• Regenerative agriculture is already widespread. USDA's new $700 million Regenerative Pilot Program builds on practices that farmers and ranchers have been adopting for decades.

• The most recent USDA data reveals that farmers adopted USDA-supported regenerative agriculture practices on nearly 40 million acres in fiscal year 2023 – an increase of more than 360% compared to a decade prior.

• Over the last two decades, the most widely adopted regenerative practices include grazing management, pest management conservation systems, nutrient management programs and cover crops.

• The overall conservation footprint in the U.S. is enormous when considering all conservation programs. In fiscal year 2023 farmers, ranchers and conservationists received financial and technical assistance for USDA-supported conservation practices on nearly 70 million acres. Importantly, on many of these acres, farmers and ranchers employ conservation practices year after year, demonstrating their ongoing commitment to protecting our soil, water, air and wildlife habitat.

Regenerative (Agriculture) Pilot Program

In December 2025, USDA announced a $700 million Regenerative (Agriculture) Pilot Program (RPP) designed to help farmers and ranchers adopt conservation practices that improve soil health and enhance water quality. Of the $700 million directed through the RPP, $400 million was for conservation practices under the Environmental Quality Incentives Program and $300 million was allocated for conservation practices under the Conservation Stewardship Program – two of the largest voluntary working lands programs operated by USDA with projected outlays of over $43 billion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s February 2026 baseline.

As part of the original RPP rollout, USDA identified 15 primary qualifying practices including cover crops, conservation crop rotation, grazing management systems, pest management systems, no-till and reduced-till tillage management, and irrigation water management, among others. These are just some of the regenerative agriculture practices that farmers and ranchers voluntarily practice on their farms.

Regenerative Practices Across American Agriculture

While USDA is incorporating these Natural Resources Conservation Service practices as part of the RPP, farmers and ranchers have been adopting these practices for decades. Data from USDA’s Soil and Water Resources Conservation Act conservation program reports reveals that from fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2023 (the most recent year of available data), farmers and ranchers voluntarily enrolled and increased their participation in a variety of conservation programs now classified by USDA as regenerative. These acres were enrolled in either a primary regenerative agriculture practice or an enhanced practice that is designed to achieve a level of conservation beyond the minimum practice standards, e.g., cover crop (practice code 340) or enhanced cover crop (practice code E340).

In fiscal year 2014, just over 8 million acres were enrolled in a regenerative agriculture practice. By fiscal year 2023, nearly 40 million acres were enrolled in a regenerative agriculture practice or an enhanced regenerative agriculture practice, representing an increase of over 360% over the 10-year period.

Year after year the top regenerative agricultural practices include grazing management followed by pest management, nutrient management and cover crops.

• Grazing management systems help farmers better manage livestock, pastures and soils to achieve specific economic and conservation objectives.

• Pest management conservation systems target only pests threatening crop productivity and can help farmers reduce their application of crop protection tools and enhance soil and water quality.

• Nutrient management systems are designed according to the 4Rs – the right nutrient source, at the right rate, right time and right place – to increase nutrient efficiency and enhance water and air quality.

• Cover crops help reduce soil erosion, build organic matter and improve nutrient cycling. Beyond soil health, cover crops help in weed suppression and water infiltration into the soil and provide wildlife habitat.

Farmers and Ranchers are America’s Original Conservationists

While the focus of this analysis is the adoption of regenerative agriculture practices through USDA’s financial and technical assistance efforts, it is important to acknowledge that many farmers adopt and continue to utilize voluntary conservation practices outside of the traditional USDA-funded efforts. Farmers and ranchers also participate in state-level initiatives and initiatives with private sector partners. Some fund their own efforts.

When including all USDA-funded conservation efforts such as the Conservation Reserve Program, the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program and the Regional Conservation Partnership Program, among others, in fiscal year 2023 alone farmers, ranchers and conservationists had deployed an approved conservation practice on nearly 70 million acres of activity.

Across America’s breadbasket and throughout the prairies, forestlands, croplands and orchards, regenerative agriculture practices are woven into the landscape. Farmers have been integrating these practices for decades to find what works best for their farms. Because these practices are not one-size-fits-all, regenerative and traditional practices can go hand-in-hand on a journey of continuous improvement.

Farm Bureau recognizes regenerative agriculture as any production system that minimizes environmental impacts, maximizes production, promotes stewardship, and increases economic viability and the productivity of soil over time. Importantly, Farm Bureau supports voluntary regenerative agriculture initiatives – conservation efforts that have long been a fixture of American agriculture. We recognize that every farm is different, and that making any change on the farm takes careful planning and comes with extra expense. Every farmer should have the opportunity to make the changes that work best for their farm, without placing their farm’s economic sustainability at risk.

Read Article on FB.org

Farmers are taking significant steps to reduce their impact on the environment. Chad Smith has more on the stats behind regenerative agriculture.

Read Article on FB.org

The American Farm Bureau Federation is celebrating the men and women of agriculture who helped build America. AFBF Executive Vice President Joby Young joined Mike Pearson on This Week in AgriBusiness to discuss FARM 250 and the Senate's version of the 2026 farm bill. You can watch the interview here.

Read Article on FB.org

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall and National Farmers Union President Rob Larew issued a joint statement today on reports that USDA plans to rescind rules that protect farmers under the Packers and Stockyards Act.

“America’s farmers are deeply troubled by news that USDA plans to rescind or continue to delay several rules that are specifically designed to benefit America’s farmers and ranchers. The rules help protect farmers from retaliation by large processors, increase transparency and improve pay systems for contract poultry growers. They make it clear that unfair and deceptive practices by meatpackers will not be tolerated, and they take on the poultry tournament pay system that for too long created winners and losers based on factors outside of growers’ control.

“The American Farm Bureau Federation and National Farmers Union, representing millions of farm families, worked for years advocating for a more level playing field. That progress is now at risk of being undone.

“The Trump administration has long said that it supports farmers and ranchers, but voiding these rules would do the exact opposite. Instead, more power would be given to large processing companies at the expense of America’s farmers. We urge President Trump and Secretary Rollins to demonstrate their commitment to farmers by leaving these critical safeguards in place.”

Read Article on FB.org

Key Takeaways

• Since 1982, cropland, pastureland and rangeland have declined, while developed land has increased by nearly 48 million acres (66%), roughly the size of Nebraska.
• Acres moving between cropland, pasture and the Conservation Reserve Program may remain connected to agriculture, while land converted to housing, industrial sites, roads or other built uses is far less likely to return to production.
• In 2024, more than 2 million landowners rented out 347.8 million acres for agricultural purposes, with non-operating landlords controlling 79% of rented-out acres.
• More than a third of non-operating landlords are 75 or older, but less than 5% of owned farmland is expected to be sold or gifted in the next five years, leaving trusts, wills, heirs and lease decisions central to who can keep farming.

Farmland pressure is often discussed as a national acreage-loss problem, but for farmers and ranchers the more immediate challenge is land access. Land can remain technically “agricultural” while becoming harder to rent, buy or keep in production. At the same time, acres converted to development, energy infrastructure or other built uses often do not return to farmland or ranchland.

The U.S. is not facing a sudden farmland cliff, but agricultural land is being reshaped by two concurrent forces: physical land-use change and ownership transition. Some acres are shifting among cropland, pasture and the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), while others are being permanently converted to development. Meanwhile, a large share of land used for farming is controlled by absentee landlords, raising questions about succession planning, access for young, beginning and new farmers, rental access and long-term affordability.

Two recent USDA reports help frame these pressures. The 2022 National Resources Inventory (NRI), released in September 2025 by USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service, tracks land cover and land-use changes on non-federal lands, including cropland, pastureland, rangeland, forestland, developed land and CRP land. The 2024 Tenure, Ownership, and Transition of Agricultural Land survey, released in March 2026 by USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service and Economic Research Service, adds the ownership lens by examining rented agricultural land, landlord ownership structures and expected land transfers.

For agriculture, the risk is not just how many acres remain on paper. It is whether productive land remains available, affordable and workable as development, energy projects, data centers and generational ownership turnover increase competition for the same land base.

The Land Base is Changing, but not all Change is the Same

The NRI shows how large and varied the U.S. land base remains. In 2022, forestland was the largest land-use category in the NRI study area at 421.5 million acres, followed by federal land at 406.4 million acres, rangeland at 399.7 million acres and cropland at 364.3 million acres. Pastureland totaled 125.4 million acres, just above developed land at 120.2 million acres.

These categories are not the same as an all-purpose measure of “farmland.” The 2022 NRI covers the 48 contiguous states, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, but not Alaska, which contains a large share of U.S. federal land (over 220 million acres). Federal land is also reported separately from the non-federal rural land-use categories the NRI tracks most closely. As a result, NRI totals are best used to understand land cover and land-use change across the primary agricultural footprint, not as a direct substitute for all-50-state land ownership or land-in-farms estimates.

Even with those limitations, the long-term direction is clear. From 1982 to 2022, cropland declined by 55.7 million acres, a 13% drop from 1982 levels and an acreage loss similar to the size of the state of Kansas. Rangeland declined by 16.3 million acres (about the size of West Virginia), down 4%, while pastureland declined by 5.7 million acres, also about 4%. Over the same period, developed land increased by 47.6 million acres, an expansion roughly the size of Nebraska and equal to about 2.5% of the entire NRI study area. Developed land now totals 120.2 million acres, or about 6% of the land and water area covered by the inventory. Forestland, other rural land and land enrolled in the CRP also increased, reinforcing that the land base is moving in multiple directions.

These comparisons put the scale in perspective, but they should not be read as a one-for-one transfer from farmland to development. A decline in cropland does not mean every acre became housing, warehouses or pavement. Some acres shifted into pasture, conservation cover, forest or other rural uses, while temporarily fallow acres generally remain within the cropland category. Other acres can move back into production as commodity markets, livestock needs, conservation contracts, drought conditions or management decisions change. Net acreage changes show direction, but it does not fully capture how much land is moving among rural uses beneath the surface.

The Conservation Reserve Program is a federal conservation program that pays landowners to remove environmentally sensitive land from production and establish long-term vegetative cover. It was created under the Food Security Act of 1985, so CRP does not appear in the 1982 baseline. In the NRI, the CRP category generally reflects land enrolled through general CRP signup. Acres enrolled through continuous CRP, which targets specific conservation practices or environmentally sensitive areas, are instead counted based on their observed land cover or use, such as grassland, forest or marsh. As a result, the NRI’s CRP category is useful for tracking land-use change, but it should not be read as identical to total CRP enrollment.

Development has Slowed, but Conversion has not Stopped

Development is the most permanent land-use pressure in the NRI, but the timing of that growth matters. Developed land increased from 72.6 million acres in 1982 to 120.2 million acres in 2022, a 66% increase. That means about 40% of all developed land in the NRI study area was developed during the last four decades.

Developed land in the NRI is broader than subdivisions or city growth. It includes large urban and built-up areas of at least 10 acres, small built-up areas between 0.25 and 10 acres and rural transportation corridors such as roads, highways and rail lines. Large urban and built-up areas drove most of the increase, nearly doubling from 46.5 million acres in 1982 to 90.5 million acres in 2022. Small built-up areas rose from 4.8 million acres to 7.5 million acres, while rural transportation remained near 22 million acres, meaning the long-term increase in developed land has come mostly from built-up expansion rather than new transportation corridors.

The pace of conversion, however, has slowed. New development peaked during the 1992–1997 period, when 10.8 million acres moved into developed uses. By comparison, newly developed land totaled roughly 3 million to 3.4 million acres in each of the last two five-year periods. That slowdown matters, but it should not be mistaken for a halt in conversion. Even at a slower pace, millions of acres are still being removed from the rural land base every five years.

The source of that newly developed land also complicates the story. Development is not coming only from cropland. Across the period studied, forestland contributed the largest share of newly developed land, followed by cropland, pastureland, rangeland and other rural land.

For agriculture, the concern is where conversion happens. Development pressure is often concentrated near population growth, transportation corridors, energy infrastructure and expanding regional economies. In those places, the loss of even a relatively small number of acres can matter if it fragments fields, raises nearby land values, complicates livestock operations or reduces the supply of land available for farmers trying to rent or buy.

Cropland is Moving, not Just Disappearing

From 2017 to 2022, most cropland remained in place. Of the 365 million acres classified as cropland in 2017, 357.3 million acres were still cropland in 2022. Among cropland acres that did shift to other uses, the largest movement was into pastureland at 5.65 million acres. By comparison, 687,000 acres moved from cropland into developed land (roughly the size of Rhode Island).

Cropland also gained acres from other rural uses. The largest source was pastureland, which contributed 4.15 million acres to cropland between 2017 and 2022, followed by 2.11 million acres from land enrolled in the CRP. In other words, the biggest recent exchange was not cropland to development, but cropland and pasture moving back and forth.

Land Access is Also a Control Issue

The land-use data show what acres are used for. The ownership data shows who controls access to farmland. That distinction is important because rented land is a major part of U.S. agriculture, not a small corner of the land market. In 2022, 39% of U.S. agricultural land was rented, roughly consistent with the share seen over the previous five decades. Rented land is especially important for larger operations and for farmers who use leasing as a way to expand without taking on the full cost of land ownership.

USDA’s 2024 Tenure, Ownership, and Transition of Agricultural Land survey shows how much of that rented land is controlled outside active farm operations. In 2024, more than 2 million landowners rented out 347.8 million acres for agricultural purposes. Cropland accounted for 59% of those rented acres, and non-operating landlords controlled 276.1 million acres, or nearly four out of every five rented acres. In practical terms, a large share of the land farmers operate depends on decisions made by landlords who are not actively farming that ground.

Those decisions are shaped by how land is owned. Among non-operating landlords, privately owned land accounted for 104.8 million rented acres, while trusts and family legal entities accounted for another 146.6 million acres combined. That ownership structure matters for access because the decision to keep land rented, sell it, place it in a trust, pass it through a will or consider non-farm offers often sits outside the farm operator’s control.

More than a third of non-operating landlords were 75 or older, and that group controlled over 40% of rented acres held by non-operating landlords. At the same time, less than 5% of owned farmland is expected to transition through sales or gifts in the next five years. Larger shares are tied to estate planning, with 10% expected to be placed in a trust and 15% written into a will.

For farmers and ranchers, the land question increasingly comes down to continuity. Land can remain agricultural but become harder to access if heirs choose different lease terms, ownership shifts into a trust, or competing offers from development, energy or other non-farm uses raise the opportunity cost of keeping land in production. The generational handoff underway may not place a large share of farmland on the market, but it will shape who can rent, buy and keep working agricultural land.

Local Pressures Reshape Land Competition

National acreage totals can make emerging land pressures look small, but farmers and ranchers experience land competition locally. A solar project, data center, subdivision or outside investment may represent a small share of U.S. agricultural land, but it can have a much larger effect in a specific county, irrigation district or production region where land, water, power and road infrastructure are limited.

Solar facilities are not tracked as a separate NRI land-use category, but utility-scale projects can create long-term competition for farmland in areas with strong transmission access. Data centers bring similar tradeoffs, offering tax base and infrastructure investment while competing for land, power and water. Foreign ownership remains a small share of the national agricultural land base, but recent increases have been tied in part to renewable energy-related acquisitions. High land values add another layer by increasing the opportunity cost of keeping land in production.

Conclusion

The U.S. is not facing an immediate farmland cliff, and recent cropland movement shows that many acres continue to shift among crop, pasture and conservation uses. But those shifts are not the same as development. Once land moves into housing, industrial sites, roads, energy infrastructure or other built uses, future agricultural use becomes far less likely.

That distinction is increasingly important as land competition intensifies. Development, solar projects, data centers, high land values and ownership transitions do not affect every acre equally, but they can quickly reshape local land markets where farmers are already competing for limited ground. For farmers operating on rented land, those pressures are even more significant because access often depends on decisions made by landlords, heirs, trusts or entities outside the farm operation.

The long-term challenge is not just preserving acreage on paper. It is maintaining a land base that can actually support production. As agriculture faces rising costs, tighter margins and increasing competition from non-farm uses, land-use decisions made today will shape whether the next generation of farmers and ranchers can enter, expand and keep working the land needed to support the U.S. farm economy.

Read Article on FB.org

The recent June acreage report gave a small look into the farm economy but didn’t tell the whole story. Chad Smith has additional insights.

Read Article on FB.org

Key Takeaways

• High oleic soybeans (HOSBs) have longer lasting cooking oil and whole roasted soybeans can be used in dairy feed.

• Farmers in 16 states (mainly Midwestern) are currently growing HOSBs, with over 1 million acres planted in 2025 and an estimated 5 million-7 million acres forecasted in the next decade.

• Soybean farmers earn a 75 cent–$1.25 per bushel premium on HOSBs above traditional varieties. HOSB production costs per acre are the same as traditional varieties.

• Dairy farmers can reduce feed costs by 27–65 cents per cow per lactating day by incorporating high oleic soybeans into feed regimens because of the increase in milk fat yields.

• The United Soybean Board and Michigan State University are driving research efforts on the potential value proposition and performance metrics for high oleic soybeans (HOSBs).

A specialty soybean originally developed for food use is increasingly finding a market in dairy cattle feed, creating a potentially valuable new demand source for soybean farmers while helping dairy producers lower feed costs, improve milk components and increase income over feed costs in volatile feed markets.

High oleic soybeans were originally developed for food manufacturers looking for a versatile cooking oil with a neutral flavor, high heat stability and longer shelf life. Today, their fastest-growing market is dairy cattle feed. With roughly 1 million HOSB acres planted in 2025 and more than half of production designated for dairy rations, researchers and industry leaders believe high oleic soybeans could become the next major value-added crop opportunity.

HOSBs are a specialty soy variety with higher levels of oleic acid (75% compared to 23% in traditional soybeans) and lower levels of linoleic acid–fatty acid compounds found naturally in soybeans. Linoleic, oleic, palmitic, linolenic and stearic are the omega 3, omega 6, omega 9 and saturated fatty acids that make up a soybean fatty acid profile. Oleic acid contributes to the longevity and stability of soybean oil, extending its shelf life. This unique acid profile has proven useful in a market where there is demand for foods with lower saturated fat levels, increased heat resistance and greater versatility than traditional varieties.

HOSBs are used in a variety of ways, including as a feed ingredient in dairy cattle rations (55%), in human food (43%) and industrial purposes (2%).

Production Estimates

High oleic soybeans have been grown in the U.S. since 2012, but acreage planted has recently expanded due to an uptick in HOSB usage for dairy cattle feed. Farmers in 16 states currently grow HOSBs (mainly Midwestern), with the highest concentration of acres in Ohio and Indiana. While production data is limited, the United Soybean Board has estimated that nearly 1 million acres of HOSBs were planted in 2025, with future expansion reaching 5 million-7 million acres in the next decade, underscoring the market’s growth potential.

Soybean harvested area for 2025 was 80.4 million acres, meaning HOSBs accounted for roughly 1.24% of total production last year. Soybean planted area for 2026 is estimated at 84.7 million acres, up 4% from last year. With greater demand, the percentage of HOSB production compared to total soybean acreage harvested is forecasted to increase anywhere from 4.66% to 7.02% within the next decade.

HOSBs are gaining traction as farm costs are increasing. USDA’s most recent production costs forecast for major field crops includes a record-high $683.89 per acre for soybeans this year and $701.48 per acre in 2027, potentially making the premiums for HOSBs an appealing option. is moving in conjunction with HOSB demand. Producers are searching for avenues to capture premium pricing for their crops while maintaining or reducing production costs.

HOSBs are generally not more costly to grow than traditional varieties. They offer comparable production costs, with the main difference being additional market access.

To date, adoption of HOSBs is seed availability; in fact, Michigan seed suppliers ran out of HOSB seed last year. There are currently 21 specialty varieties of soybeans available that produce oil with higher oleic acid, including Plenish® from Corteva, Vistive Gold® from Bayer and SOYLEIC® from Beck’s.

For soybean farmers it is important to consider potential implications when switching to a new variety. Producing clean, high-quality beans is essential for staying within the premium pool. HOSBs must fit into your farm operation based on personal needs, constraints, and goals.

The High Oleic Advantage: Dairy Feed Applications

Companies including Nestlé and Frito-Lay continue to demand HOSBs for their unique fatty acid profile and oil longevity. On the industrial side, HOSBs serve as a lower-cost alternative for biobased products as the oil provides excellent stability and high-heat performance. However, the latest and most unique application of HOSBs is in dairy cattle nutrition.

Research led by land-grant universities shows HOSBs provide high-quality fat and protein sources for cattle at a reduced cost. According to the research, HOSBs did not impact milk production, but did show slight increases in milk fat concentration.

Traditional roasted soybeans have been a common source of fat (15%-22%) and protein (33%-40%) in dairy cattle’s total mixed rations. However, traditional soy is high in certain fatty acids that cause milk fat reduction, limiting its use in dairy rations.

HOSBs contain a rumen-bypass protein that allows cattle to absorb the energy and nutrients without disrupting normal fermentation and beneficial fatty acids. Rumen-bypass proteins are energy dense, so adding these sources to cattle diets can increase milk yield without increasing feed volume. Farmers can increase milk fat content and yield, while reducing feed costs and maintaining rumen health.

When substituting HOSBs for traditional roasted soybeans, high oleic soybeans resulted in 0.17 units higher milk fat concentration and 0.2 pounds higher milk fat yield, according to a Penn State University study. HOSBs contribute more fat and protein to dairy rations, directly translating to stronger milk components and increased profitability for farmers.

Replacing purchased protein and fat supplements with roasted HOSBs can significantly improve margins. Research trials have fed diets containing 5% to 24% HOSB (on a dry matter basis) to lactating cows and reported positive outcomes in feed intake and milk fat yields. For an industry paid based on the components in their milk, finding a feed source that can increase milk fat yield and improve feed efficiency without negatively affecting intake is a huge win for dairy farmers.

Research showed promise that dairy producers could decrease their feeding cost when planting soybeans themselves or purchasing from local growers. The income-over-feed-cost advantage is 65 cents per cow per lactating day for farms producing and roasting their own HOSBs and about 27 cents per cow per lactating day for farms buying roasted beans and paying transport, according to Michigan State University research. Income-over-feed is a metric used to calculate the money left over from selling an animal’s output (milk in this case) after subtracting the cost of the feed. It highlights farm efficiency as producers balance feeding high-quality rations and maximizing profitable output.

The overall profit advantage of producing and roasting the beans on-site is where the margins positively shift. On a 1,000-cow dairy, producing, roasting and feeding HOSBs could be a difference of $50,000-$60,000 a year in profit given typical butterfat prices for 2025.

Farm Margins

High oleic soybeans have returned $396 million in premium payments to farmers to date, providing an opportunity for producers in the Midwest to capture market premiums. HOSBs offer improved dairy feed performance, enhanced oil stability and greater industrial applications. Expanding into three new major markets has allowed HOSB producers to earn a 75 cents–$1.25 per bushel premium above traditional varieties. While HOSBs offer increased profit potential, it doesn’t take away demand from commodity soybean oil, which still meets the needs of many food and nonfood customers.

HOSBs unique fatty acid profile expands the market and uses for soybeans with the same agronomic performance as traditional varieties. The United Soybean Board has funded $139 million through its checkoff to advance research on HOSBs, including investments in improving seed genetics. Discoveries are leading to stronger HOSB genetics that are on par with or better in yield, have more resistance to diseases, and have better quality oil than traditional varieties.

Conclusion

HOSBs improve dairy milk fat yields, lower feed costs and improve dairy profit potential, while offering premium prices to soybean farmers. HOSBs create a unique opportunity for dairy farmers but more research is needed to determine the best-fit use in dairy feed regimes. There are several factors to consider such as optimal grind size, amount to feed, potential need for other fatty acids in feed rations, and costs. While high oleic soybeans present clear economic and nutritional benefits for both dairy producers and soybean farmers, further research is essential to fully optimize their value in dairy feeding systems.

Read Article on FB.org

The American Farm Bureau is looking for the next Farm Dog of the Year. Chad Smith has details on the beloved contest.

Read Article on FB.org

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

• Despite barriers to using the H-2A temporary agricultural visa program, farmers are increasingly turning to the program to meet their labor needs. In fiscal year 2026, H-2A use is already up 17% in volume, as fewer than 0.07% of those jobs received a domestic applicant.

• Rep. G.T. Thompson’s Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act (SAWA) makes important strides in controlling unpredictable labor-related costs, modernizing an antiquated visa program, and enhancing access for agricultural sectors that previously could not participate in the program, like dairy.

Agriculture’s Labor Challenges

2026 is a year of important milestones for our country. Nearly all Americans will leave Fourth of July weekend with fresh memories of the America 250 celebrations. Many fewer will recognize that it has been 40 years since lawmakers last reformed our agricultural labor and immigration programs via the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.

Why does that matter? For one, it was the last time Congress passed farm labor reforms into law, despite multiple attempts. It is also a reminder that farmers have been struggling with labor shortages for decades with little relief from policymakers.

Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act

Enter Glenn “G.T.” Thompson, a nine-term Pennsylvania congressman and current chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. In 2023, he appointed a bipartisan group of lawmakers to deliberate and deliver solutions for the primary guestworker program for U.S. agriculture – the H-2A program. This group met with a broad cross-section of stakeholders, including farmers and ranchers who struggle to secure a reliable workforce regardless of commodity or region. The product of that work serves as the foundation for his newly introduced Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act (SAWA).

The proposal centers on three key H-2A reform: controlling costs, improving access, and modernizing and streamlining the program.

The costs of using the program are significant. Employers are required by law to pay housing, transportation and mandatory wage costs for H-2A employees, as well as cover the administrative costs of the program. The Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR), the minimum hourly wage rate H-2A employees must be paid, has been the major and unpredictable cost driver for farmers. In the past decade alone, the AEWR has easily outpaced private sector wage growth, with the AEWR rising by 60% compared to a 49% increase in private sector wage growth. However, unlike most in the private sector, farmers cannot pay for increased labor costs by raising their prices; they are price takers not price makers.

SAWA restructures a flawed methodology by adopting reforms by the U.S. Department of Labor following the welcome discontinuation of the USDA Farm Labor Survey. The new rule also recognizes the extensive nonwage costs associated with the program and factors those costs in into the final AEWR determination. Along with codifying the Trump administration’s October 2025 AEWR reforms, which will save farmers hundreds of millions of dollars in inflated costs, SAWA adds sensible reforms to by capping year-over-year growth and eliminating mid-contract changes, thereby limiting the unpredictability that has long plagued the program.

The involvement of three Cabinet-level departments (Labor, Homeland Security, State) and various state agencies that poorly communicate with each other and the employers and employees they serve has long undermined the program’s efficiency. For example, delays, backlogs and other inefficiencies have become too common in the petitioning process, which results in lost time on the farm and reduced productivity, which hurts a farm’s preparedness and economic sustainability.

SAWA directs the agencies to create an online platform as a single point of access for growers and reinstitutes the in-person interview waiver for returning H-2A workers who have a proven history of vetting and reliability. Importantly, SAWA also designates H-2A workers as essential, which will keep government funding disruptions from halting the program’s functionality.

The current H-2A program only provides farmers with a seasonal and temporary workforce. This limited eligibility prevents the many sectors in production agriculture with year-round – and sometimes even hourly – labor needs from using the program. These sectors include, but are not limited to, operations like dairies with consistent milking needs, horticultural operations with plants at various stages, and livestock operations with varying animal husbandry needs.

SAWA strikes the seasonal requirement and clarifies the temporary designation for workers just under a year’s length. And the legislation ensures that many previously precluded sectors will be eligible for H-2A workers, including dairy and livestock occupations. Coupled with additional reforms, SAWA provides a long-desired option for farmers with year-round needs to secure a labor force where domestic interest in this work is absent.

The Time to Address Agricultural Labor Shortages is Now

Our agricultural workforce challenges are complex, multi-factored, and often misunderstood. Federal policymakers should seek to understand the labor needs of family farms and the direct implications for U.S. competitiveness in the global landscape. Struggling with this persistent and defining problem for decades, so many family farms – nearly 200,000 in the past decade, in fact – have closed down.

With the farm economy currently underwater in so many areas, Congress has an obligation to get the Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act on the president’s desk. For the sake of family farm sustainability and national security, Farm Bureau urges lawmakers to pass this critical legislation as soon as possible.

AFBF Policy Supports:

• A visa program that is open to all segments of agriculture and flexible enough to provide for the differing needs of farmers and ranchers, including seasonal and year-round employers;
• A wage methodology that would cap year-over-year increases and is based on sound data.
• A visa program that is simplified and cost-competitive.

Read Article on FB.org

July 1 was an important date for the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. Chad Smith has more on renewal negotiations underway.

Read Article on FB.org