SmartTranscript of House Agriculture – 2025-01-24 –10:00AM

[Tony ]: Right. Yeah. [Annie ]: Go ahead. Jake, just while we're at this point Yeah. On [Representative O'Brien ]: an app. What what do you want this committee to get out of this? I mean, such a tsunami of data, but Yeah. I think a policy sort of bill request or proposals or these things we should be thinking about? [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. Yeah. I think this is more and so that for the record, Jake Claro, farm to plate director at the Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund. So I think this is more about setting context for requests that are gonna be coming to the committee. You know, really, as for farm to plate, we're representing, you know, the the plan. And, you know, this is the effort of of many people in the food system and trying to give direction and priorities. And so I think, you know, just a a backstop to to have, to reference and give context to where those requests might be coming from and why, you know, their strategic importance or alignment. And also yeah. And and also with this data, you know, just having that source to check of, like, you know, how does this line up with trends, or how does this address some of the barriers that might be identified in the information that we're presenting. And, yeah, I did wanna yeah. Just as I start to just to, like, get, like, a couple of bullets of, like, big things that I think should be taken away from this presentation from a you know, that that you probably will be hearing more about from a policy standpoint. And yeah. So is that Yeah. [Ellen Kaler ]: That's helpful. Okay. I would only I would only tag Ellen Kaler in my single job site. I would only add that, for instance, one of the the tasks you all have every year is to do your memo to the house appropriations committee. And so if any of this data can be used as additional, like, the why, this is important. Right? There's always competition for available funds that are never enough. And so having these this data at your fingertips to say, you know, this is a growing industry. This is why with this policy that we wanna promote or this funding request that we have, like, it's all available to you to use as part of your your why, your your supporting things. [Tony ]: Yeah. [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. Thanks for that question. It's great. Okay. Yeah. So, let me get going here and and just do a, yeah, quick kind of recap to get to where we left off. And I did some of you had asked some questions too that, I have now some answers to. So, just on the, there was a question about employment, you know, so we covered a lot of the economics in the food system. And I think the, you the big takeaway here is, you know, food and farming is a huge part of Vermont's economy. It has a huge economic impact, and within the farm and food economy, you know, we have a diversity of industries. Certainly dairy is, you know, the mature and and large industry in the state, but we have an assortment of other production, you know, that's starting to grow. And I and I think a big takeaway from that is, those industries, you know, need continued support, for infrastructure investment, technical assistance, and and market, development. And so the one of the questions was, you know, what percentage of total employment does this sixty three thousand four hundred and ninety one represent that the people that are employed in the food system? That's, it's twenty, twenty point six percent of total employment in the state. So just as Ellen was saying, like, you know, providing some of the why, you know, that's a figure right there that I think is really impactful. And if you look at just, farm sort of farm operators, hired farm labor, and processors, processing manufacturer employees, that number is that's nine point two percent of the total labor force of employees in the state of Vermont. So so twenty point six percent in total, but if you look at just production processing, that's nine point two percent. So that was one one thing that the question came up around. I'm just gonna go through here. So what was the other one? Oh, yeah. And then there was a question about so, again, we kinda went through all these, you know, economic indicators. There was a question about the food local food sales and so what what percentage was alcohol or beverages as a as a part of that? So it's the in twenty seventeen, beverages were about twenty five a quarter, twenty five percent of the total local food sales, and the majority of those beverage sales could be accounted for as beer, is the is the and and from twenty fourteen to twenty seventeen, the growth in craft beverages or craft beer was about seventeen percent of the total local food sales growth between twenty fourteen and twenty seventeen. But the growth from twenty seventeen to twenty twenty was not due to growth in the beverage, sector. So just a little more context for that. [Ellen Kaler ]: It's also the case that during that same period, we had a lot of tap rooms that were built, and a lot of Vermont food is served in those tap rooms. So you think about the beer hall, the taps the tracks beer hall in Stowe, for instance, or Lawson's finest in in, waste field. Like, the amount of food, local food that they're also moving, charcuterie boards, cheeses, those kind you know, fermented pickles, all of that stuff, is also been really expanding. So along with the beer, of course. [Jake Claro ]: And and, yeah, just another takeaway of that, our local food sales, you know, they're they're spread across multiple market channels. So Vermonters have the ability, to to purchase or consume or be provided with local food in a number of different places. And I think, you know where we have put investment into developing these markets for local food, we have seen increase increases in sales or access. So there's there's a direct line, I think, of efficacy in getting local foods into markets when we put our attention to it. We talked about grocery, you know, this is just a huge part of spending and a huge opportunity, but one that also presents a lot of challenges for our producers. And this is where also infrastructure investment you know, is a is a big prerequisite oftentimes for accessing, retail markets, whether that's, you know, for processing, for value added, distribution infrastructure, storage infrastructure. You have to manage, you know, larger volumes, move, larger amounts of product into the grocery channel. [Annie ]: Represent us. [Representative Nelson ]: I've been thinking about this and, like, your next slide, you show the Dollar General's and what's not, which we're not gonna crack into. They're just they're not appropriately not interested in what we do. Yeah. You know, and you have the food co ops up there. We have one in Newport. And [Ellen Kaler ]: it's not convenient. [Representative Nelson ]: Mhmm. And it it almost serves and don't throw stuff at me. It almost serves the niche market. You know, they're they're they have a clientele that are dedicated. I I I I got in there over Christmas, And it's a wonderful store. You know, marketing marketing marketing to broaden their mark mark and scope to everybody. You know, I just [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. And, absolutely, in showing the number of stores here, it's definitely this is then the question of where does it make strategic sense to try and influence or change the, you know, the purchasing or the, get out of that store or to help producers get in. And I you know, we were just talking the other day with some folks in New England about Dollar General to say the same thing. Right? Like, that's probably not the best choice for us to focus on. We have these hundred and one independent stores, which, we've been doing programming with, and helping helping them, you know, increase their local products. But, also, we're thinking about, you know, Hannaford's has regional and local purchasing commitments. So what are the what are the more effective ways to work with their supply chain management teams? [Ellen Kaler ]: Yeah. There you go. [Jake Claro ]: And so, yeah, that is definitely, yeah, something that we're putting a lot of attention to. That's something that the New England region is putting a lot more focus into, and, yeah, to be very targeted and and strategic with that. [Tony ]: I think that, [Annie ]: you know, it's a good point. And, you know, it might seem like there's no way, you know, you ever crack into the dollar stores. I I remember, though, thinking ten or twelve years ago, you sort of stopping and recognizing that suddenly you could get organic food in, like, government farms or at drugstores, which, you know, not too long before that had would have seemed like that would never happen. Yeah. You know, there's that's a niche market, and that's a, you know Yeah. Pretty small demand category. And then, yep, that change that evolved. [Ellen Kaler ]: When you think about the change that we've seen at the with the Maple Fields convenience stores. I mean, they are actually sourcing quite a bit of of local products in in all of their chain stores. The other thing I will say on the co op side, every co op is independent. So for instance, the hunger metal co op here in in Montpelier or the city market once in in Burlington, we know that during the height of the season, they're moving, like, forty percent of all of the food going through those stores is local. [Representative Nelson ]: Oh, okay. Oh, no. Yeah. [Ellen Kaler ]: So so but I think your point is really important in that we need to be getting the those not the non co ops to be upping their game. Because what the co ops are doing, biggest ones, they're doing tens of millions of dollars in local food sales. Like, it is not a, like, a drop in the bucket. And so if you have some stores that are doing forty percent, you know, and you've then you've got others like a Shaw's or Hannaford's trying to get them up to five, even ten percent. Like, we're moving the needle then. [Representative Nelson ]: Well, it's like your independent stores, and I pick up two in our area and one's from Newport Market [Ellen Kaler ]: Mhmm. [Representative Nelson ]: Which used to be part of it's it's a it's a small chain of stores. The Newport Market, I think, still has one. Max? [Annie ]: Is it Yeah. [Representative Nelson ]: I was not Max. It's now called Stow Village Market. Yeah. It was previously Max. In fifteen months. And so we have Newport Village Market in there all. Same group. And, of course, then we have the Derby Village store, which is an IGA. Yep. And Derby Village store is very good with, like, selling local produce. Right. But it's keeping them supplied consistently. Kindly. It will pursue which is education on the producer. You know, if you wanna crack into this market, but you need to keep them spun, they don't wanna run out. Yep. Right. And in, you know, the the meat stuff seems to be going pretty good with these stores. I know a lot of Yep. Is got is in real good [Ellen Kaler ]: which is all local. Yep. Yep. Totally. [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. And and you've representative Nelson, you're also bringing up some important points about, you know, the readiness factor of of producers themselves, and there's an education process there. And that's, you know, again, why, you know, we think tech like, there's a lot of technical assistance and, work to be done to to help their business acumen, to to be successful in these markets. Because if you fail, or if you don't do something well one time, you know, that could eliminate your possibilities for for selling to those places in the future. So it's a and it's a very, you know, it's a very competitive environment. So it requires a lot of, you know, coordination and and support, for our producers to be successful there. Representative, Brian, just while we're [Representative O'Brien ]: on data, how how do you account for, I mean, some of us border towns or, like, the upper valley, a ton of Vermont shoppers go to Hampshire. Same types of stores, but are are they included in this, or do you [Jake Claro ]: is this strictly geographical? Yeah. Not in our so not in our s our local food purchasing estimates. So if those purchases are happening in New Hampshire, it wouldn't be accounted for. But, you know, as we think about sort of our New England strategy and accounting for a number of stores and thinking about, you know, developing better distribution. You know, distributors don't just sell, you know, to a store in Vermont. Like and so that's part of the the approach is to really think about, you know, in getting on a distributor's truck, you're not only getting access to a local market, you're potentially getting access to, you know, stores across the border too. [Representative O'Brien ]: Certainly a lot of Vermont food who say sold it at the tube in New Hampshire. Yeah. Hanover co op. Yeah. Vermont is five. Yes. I mean, we, like, go out and stay to buy Vermont. [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. And we're we we have some good relationships with folks at the Hanover co op, and and they're, you know, they're very involved, obviously, in the upper valley region. Yeah. So, yeah, just kind of going through here. So we talked about direct sales and how there's this change in nature, of, you know, evolving from just direct to consumer to now a lot of you know, as that market has matured, now there's more direct to retail, direct to institutions, and also direct to food hubs. So we've got, you know, a number of food hubs across the state that are providing really essential distribution services to producers to access, you know, new markets. And so we've seen some significant growth in that. And so when you add that all up, direct sales are increasing quite a bit. So then we got to to land. So we're getting close to where we left off. And I think the the main the main takeaways here that, farmland has been decreasing over time. Certainly, there are, remaining, pressures and and challenges, for from development. So potentially, you know, business as usual case, we could be losing another forty one thousand acres, and American Farmland Trust has done some analysis of this of where that farmland is particularly at risk. And also we talked about a little bit about outside of development pressures, there's a lot of just land use decision making that's happening this year. You know, a lot of reforms with Act two fifty and just being mindful of, still making sure there's protection for, farmland, for prime primary for prime agricultural soils, And and that yeah. Balancing, obviously, you know, the housing and development needs of the state with the needs to to ensure that we're protecting our land base so it can provide food security, food production for people that live here. And yeah, and right now, you know, so the one of the things that I want to reiterate on this is that, yes, dairy, you know, dairy land, has decreased over time. Some of that has shifted into crop production for livestock and for for dairy. So we can't, you know, we cannot think about the future of dairy farmland because whether it transitions to other forms of production livestock production, whether it stays in dairy and and is, you know, a big part of our economy in that way, or how does it transition to smaller, you know, other forms of production that require less, less land base or are not, you know, have not historically used such large pieces of land for their production. So we're talking a lot about, you know, vegetable production, thirty thousand acres, but only about thirty six hundred of those acres are actually in cropping year over year. So what does it look like for, you know, a vegetable farm that's historically operate on thirty acres to then acquire and produce on on a land that's two hundred acres? It's a it's a much bigger jump. And there's in these conversations, there's a lot of also conversations about different land access models where multiple producers are perhaps purchasing or leasing. And there's a lot of, you know, legal kind of legal and financial elements to that that present challenges to how those, arrangements are structured. We've been, working with Intervale Center on looking at those, and I think that's just, you know, a policy consideration, to think about is, how do we promote and incentivize different types of ownership structure on farmland where it may require multiple owners, to be operating, you know, a large track of land that traditionally was a a sole operation. And then I think we're close to getting so, you know, our farmers are you know, farmland is is also diverse as you start to look at it. So a lot of the majority of it is actually woodland, and, you know, cropland pasture, and then the farmsteads and buildings. So farmers are also just managing a, you know, a large diversity of types of land uses on their land, and, and that's, you know, quite unique. You know, think about how many other businesses, are, you know, managing a woodlot, producing food, have open land. There's, you know, not many. And this is just kind of making a finer point on that. You know, our cropland is very dedicated to livestock production. And so when you start to look at cropland, you know, there's that vegetable percentage is only one percent, of of cropland at three thousand six hundred acres. So, you know, vegetable production is it is growing, but it has a, you know, currently a small footprint of on the land base. And so, again, just a lot of considerations for how does that expand, what types of support or incentives are needed to, yeah, support the expansion of these other types of of cropping that may not have historically used large tracts of land. [Representative O'Brien ]: To to meet our our the the targets in the New England pigs, New England, what are there some thoughts on how much acreage, say, for vegetables we need in the state? [Jake Claro ]: I would probably guess the Yeah. Sure. [Ellen Kaler ]: To look it up, but it's it's we we the calculation was that we needed to bring about a million acres across the six states into production in total. Some of that would be grass fed meats, livestock, but a large chunk. I'll look it up before I get get in. It's but it's I think it's a couple more thousand. So if we can look it up. [Representative Nelson ]: Okay. So when we talk about this stuff and and what I hear a lot of times is organic, is grass fed and whatnot. Or I assume we're not against conventional grown and and and, you know, more of a traditional, like our beef goes through our operations and their fed refusals from our dairy cows. They do they do very, very, very well. We we can hit we can hit fine. Yeah. With our beef. And and so the be gentle with your message because a lot of times, those people in my world hear organic. They hear grass fed. Yes. And and and they say, well, they're not even interested in what I do. [Annie ]: Mhmm. Yeah. [Representative Nelson ]: And and so that just and and I assumed you weren't. I just wanna bring that to you with your message. Yes. Yeah. [Jake Claro ]: Thank you. That's great. And we're we are involved right now with a a dairy beef project that is so it's it's working on crossing Wagyu genetics with Holsteins, and and that is a project that is working with, you know, conventional dairies and also some producers who are in, who are in sheep and lamb production. So I, yeah, I think the message across the board is that we need we need we need all of it. You know it's all of these things interrelate and the success of one oftentimes impacts the success of another and we've definitely heard this around you know large animal vets as conventional dairies have struggled that limits the availability of large animal vets for other others. Same with equipment. So, you know, yeah, I I [Representative Nelson ]: think, [Jake Claro ]: really looking at this in total and saying all of these things are important, and there's different ways that they contribute to the economy, environment, and community of of Vermont. And I'll actually yeah. There's now as I'm starting to get into some of the environmental stuff to touch upon this a little more. [Ellen Kaler ]: Just to answer, or through O'Brien's, it's going from currently ninety seven thousand five hundred acres in vegetables across the six states to two hundred and thirty five thousand to go to get to thirty percent. So quite a large increase. [Representative O'Brien ]: So And we only have three thousand out of that ninety seven thousand. [Ellen Kaler ]: A lot of it's potatoes in Maine. Yeah. [Representative Nelson ]: They got they got potatoes and broccoli. [Representative O'Brien ]: Yeah. Yeah. [Representative Nelson ]: No. That's huge. Yeah. [Jake Claro ]: So, water quality, there has been tremendous, work at the state level around, you know, water quality, addressing water quality issues and phosphorus. And, this I had to thank the agency. They have so they have a great dashboard that you all can find this information on, as does the agency of natural resources. But, over a period of time from twenty sixteen to now, you know, over four hundred and ninety three thousand acres of conservation practices have been implemented and over two hundred thousand kilograms of phosphorus have been reduced through those practices. So, you know, we're seeing real real impact through that work, and I'll I'll get into this a little more. But here's just a a look at let me minimize this. So, you know, as as investment and money and resources have been put into, water quality practices, you know, we have seen real uptake, in implementation over time. And the twenty twenty four number there is not a full, fiscal year yet. So, that number likely will be around that one hundred and twenty thousand acres of implemented practices. So we're seeing, you know, real on the ground impact through the investments, technical assistance, and work of our farmers to implement those practices. And, you know, on on the whole, the majority are in cover cropping, newer injection, nutrient management, but we've seen some other, practices emerge over time like precision ag, rotational grazing, reduced tillage. So a very, diverse mix of of types of practices. And then, again, to to reemphasize, you know, this has led to, significant phosphorus reductions, and I'm gonna get into the cost effect effectiveness of that. But you can see that, you know, as these practices are implemented, they do have real impacts on on phosphorus. [Annie ]: Yes, sir. Go back to that slide again for a sec. And we're gonna say something, Annie? [Tony ]: Sure. Please, Tony. [Ellen Kaler ]: I'll let you. [Tony ]: So for the record, I'd be willing to provide agency of agriculture, food and markets. I just wanted to make just sort of like a a plug for this case study success of cover cropping. So, I mean, you can just see the kind of, like, the tremendous growth in cover cropping, conservation practice implementation. Before I came to the agency in two thousand eleven, I worked for the Winooski Natural Resources Conservation District, and we spent many years sort of doing some cover cropping pilot projects on farms to sort of say, try this practice. It's great. It works well. It's, you know, it's good for your soil and fewer passes across your fields. You'll have fuel reduction benefits. You'll see crop yield improvements. And it was a really hard sell. We worked specifically on a pilot project in the Mad River Valley primarily because there was a lot of traffic that would drive kind of the main route and see brown fields in the winter, and they were there was a lot of concern around kind of pollution inputs to the mad river. And that population of agricultural producers was really willing to be kind of, like, part of this pilot to, like, see if it would improve neighbor relations and then if they would see environmental benefits, water quality improvements, and then other phosphorus production and cost effectiveness as a farm. What we found in that project, which I think is very applicable to so many of these other kind of water quality improvement practices, is that we needed farmers to tell farmers about the practice being valuable for them. So once there were farmers that had had success and felt like it had worked for their operation, for them to tell their neighbors and members of their community that it was working well. We also needed to, like, have data to show them that, like, it was making a difference. Like, it was saving them fuel cost. It was resulting in crop yield or or organic matter growth. And then for us to actually support the for the for the practice to be supported, we had to incentivize it. And so then that resulted in Vermont government at that time with support from other organizations providing cost share assistance programs to sort of, like, ease the entry burden for farms to, to adopt in practice. And if you then look at, like, thirty four percent of the conservation practices across the state or is now cover cropping, it's, like, truly an example of when you combine farmer to farmer education, cost sharing incentivization, and sharing the data, like, best practices are implemented. [Jake Claro ]: So [Annie ]: Julie. The two things I wanted to just clarify that these are reductions, and it's reductions against some baseline figure that was established in twenty fifteen or prior to Yeah. [Jake Claro ]: And it's and these are modeled figures, so it's you know, the yeah. [Annie ]: And then just I don't know whether you were gonna comment on the twenty twenty four bar being lower quite a [Jake Claro ]: bit lower than the previous two years. Yeah. So, like, the so the acres of practices, twenty twenty four is an incomplete, fiscal year right now. So that number should be closer to the previous year's. Okay. [Annie ]: Yeah. Reverend Nelson. I [Representative Nelson ]: we did thousand acres this year. By far, the most we've ever done with putting a dedicated kid from after school. He he drove out, got in the drill, and just drilled till dark. I wouldn't let him go past dark. He's just kinda slice. K. So we did a thousand acres. And Thousand acres of what? Cover crop. Yeah. And the response from the community and the response from the eighty soon to be eighty three year old previous owner, my father, is then unbelievable. He just says, why don't we do that on every acre? That is the most beautiful thing I've ever seen. And our neighbors are all everybody gets a it's it's a win win win. We're gonna take that to your farmers. It just your your community gets behind it. The deer love it. The turkeys love it. The geese love it. And next late June when the dirt hits seventy five degrees and that cover crop breaks down, the corn loves it. But it is another management tool, and there is and there is real cost to it. All the costs all the incentive money we got went to purchase and seed. Yeah. That's how come we could do so many acres. We eat the you know, we had we got a grant for you for partial payment on our two smallest cedar. It's only fifteen, but it needs to be thirty. But we'll someday, we will go beyond. And so, you know, some firms can't eat that cost of application, so they use that money for all of its seed and application cost, I believe. But we use it all to purchase seed. [Jake Claro ]: And, we'll get into this a little more too with some of the sort of, like, climate related elements, but, yeah, there's a lot of, co benefits to these practices for, carbon sequestration, for wildlife and and other environmental quality related issues. And also a lot of these programs are year over year oversubscribed and and so just really essential, you know, yeah, that that incentive is is there and also that, you know, there's there's people along the way that can help farms make, these transitions or help with the, yeah, management changes that, come with it. So, and then just on the on the cost effectiveness side, investing in these practices is, tremendously cost effective. So this is a little this, graphic is a little wonky. It's called, like, a boxing whisker, graph. And, what it's try what it's showing is basically the the variance from the there's a there's a mean or a median in in in here. And then the top line is the the maximum value that you could see, and then the bottom line would be the the minimum value. So you're seeing the variance that makes basically makes up the average. And so, you know, agriculture by far is the the most cost effective investment that you can make in order. So for every dollar invested, you know, you get a kilogram of phosphor phosphorous reduction at a lower cost than these other categories. [Annie ]: This was a question that came up. I don't want to spend too much time on this, but last year when we were having the conversation about forestry practices, logging practices, and whether we wanted to take some money from the Clean Water Fund or from another source and, help, that sector of the economy with their reduction. Some of the pushback that we got was, I think, related to this that, yeah, if we don't, you know, if we put those resources in Mhmm. Air, then we don't have them for heat air, which one is ultimately more cost effective. So I I think that's probably what this is showing us. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But at the same time, we're not ignoring stormwater runoff or, transportation or or any of the other ways, and, and we shouldn't be. [Jake Claro ]: Right. Yeah. Exact yeah. Exactly. It's, you know yeah. Both both and and and what can fund, these different, you know, categories is also different. And I think, you know, yeah, the the takeaway for me and and maybe for the committee as well could be that, you know, if the if the question arises as to why like, why are we putting so many dollars into these agricultural practices? You know, the response to that could be, well, it's it's incredibly effective in order to meet, phosphorus reduction goals. And as we'll talk about, it's also important for other co benefits. So Representative Brian. [Representative O'Brien ]: For for you, Abby. Is there any tracking done of essentially agricultural land that's that's no longer being farmed? So not developed, but it's just out there, you know, that was marked and all the farms are constantly going through out of business or the dairy farms and then it gets not get hay. They start to become you know, grow back into shrubbery and forest. Good good for phosphorus reduction, probably good for wall water quality in a lot of ways. But, you know, as far as this conversation about agriculture goes, maybe potentially turn back into agriculture. But I just wondered if that's gotta be a a large amount of acreage in the state. And I'm just Like, is this good? Is this bad? What is this? [Tony ]: We refer to it as, like, fallow land. Right. [Ellen Kaler ]: So it's [Tony ]: not not returned to forest yet. It's not under current cultivation or annual cropping. And it's, yeah, reverting back actually to kind of a source of state. [Jake Claro ]: So it's another thing that New England feeding New England as part of its estimates for that thirty by thirty goal, did analysis around. [Tony ]: Yeah. So out of that million acres, five hundred thousand in the region would need to be new acres and, like, four hundred and ninety thousand acres would be reverting that fallow, unutilized land back into more intensive productive kind of ad use. Mhmm. I think we capture it through the census, but it, you know, it it shows up as, like, other ad land, and it's a pretty big percentage. You know, I guess, like, twenty percent or something. I can't remember exactly. Yeah. But, yeah, I mean, it's a it's and that amount of other land that's not in kind of active production does shift when our farm use changes or our farm sizes change or the production kind of practice changes. You know, either fields are too small or the equipment's too big or the energy is too difficult to reach or it's not easy to graze or, you know, it's not the right drainage for or, you know, tillage. You know, there's a lot of reasons why kind of land it's not kind of, like, prime agricultural soil or, you know, the best fit for the operator's intent. It kind of gets neglected. [Representative O'Brien ]: Yeah. [Tony ]: But I think the New England New England reports, Jake referenced, like, recognize that that is land that's not developed. It is at least, you know, likely of statewide significant soil. So it's good soil. It may not be the best soil, but it's still, you know, well suited for ag production. And it could be, you know, revitalized and brought back into production. Yeah. You wanna answer [Ellen Kaler ]: your your question? [Representative Nelson ]: Abby, a lot of that soil, if it in my world, we call it tough land. Mhmm. Roughly, rocky. It it could be wet. We would have to get ANR to allow significant improvements to happen on that land. And and, I mean, if we could subcategorize it towards the vegetable farming aspect, I mean, if, you know, things grow in dirt. And, so you your first requirement is to have soil unless you're gonna be hydroponic in inner structure. Your first requirement is to have soil, but you've gotta have that soil so you can work it. I drive by a whole bunch of it when I come in here every day. And, you know, when I look at it, I hate that. But if you do what I'm saying and and then elevation. You know, you you get above twelve hundred feet. Things don't grow the same, but your cool season crop would be phenomenal up there. Your spinach, your lettuce, your beets, your whatnot, carrots, your root crops. But we would really have to crack ANR on that because it would you know, you you see what they do when you go to Montreal, if you ever go outdoors Montreal. That's all swamped up there. And they've got that tile drained [Tony ]: in [Representative Nelson ]: a carpet matter, ditches every so many feet. They're they're controlling the water, and they've taken that land, that black earth land, and made it incredibly productive. There's there's a place up in Brandy that's incredible. Like, that means kind of soil. But, you know, I'm toward Montreal, and I go on all day about this all and stuff. But, anyway, it there's things that we should look at to promulgate there's my five dollar word for the day. To promulgate vegetable farming, like, you know, like, not fifty, sixty thousand pound equipment out there, but, you know, your could Kubota tractor you saw with the with the cultivator on it. You know? That could work. It just needs help to get established. You know? Heather Heather could work that land and do very well with that, whether grazing and or vegetables. It just you know, it you need help to get it and then you're fighting you're fighting someone because it's got a view. You're fighting that aspect. So that's where we get with We should probably [Tony ]: Yeah. Yeah. [Annie ]: Keep going. [Jake Claro ]: Committee discussion. Well and and, yeah, committee discussion that that could relate is, is also emergent agroforestry practices so it's really trying to integrate you know trees and shrubs into other types of agricultural production so those yeah marginal lands could potentially be you know a good fit for a lot of innovation that's happening and stay in that industry. So turning to greenhouse gas emissions and climate, when we look at the emissions profile of the state, so agriculture is almost sixteen percent of the estimated greenhouse gas emissions, as part of the greenhouse gas emission inventory. And then the the graphic here on the the left hand side, is looking at, by sector, what the emissions targets are, that dotted line for twenty twenty five. So, you know, right now, agriculture, you know, is not is is above the the target, as are all of the others aside from electricity. So there's, you know, progress here to be made. And agriculture, you know, is a is a portion of greenhouse gas emissions in the state. And where those emissions are coming from is primarily associated with with livestock. So, you've got, you know, methane emissions coming from livestock plus associated manure management. But then there's there are also emissions from soils that are associated with all types of production depending on the practices. And yeah. But, you know, so for almost yeah. Almost fifty percent are from livestock and then another almost thirty percent from the manure management associated with that. [Annie ]: Enteric that word is enteric? [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. Enteric fermentation. Yeah. So that's the the the the way that ruminate's processed. The food they eat and it produces methane as as a result. CH four methane? Yeah. CH four is methane. Yeah. [Annie ]: And the liming and urea fertilization, that's a small number. Again, we can't see it on the screen. Yeah. [Jake Claro ]: It's not yeah. And it's yeah. So two two percent. So that's, you know, related with soil, you know, soil management. [Annie ]: So and just noting that the the numbers haven't changed the total hasn't changed very much over the That's right. Years. Yeah. [Jake Claro ]: Yep. Yeah. So it's pretty pretty stable emissions profile, which which also speaks to, you know, as we look at this more and put more attention to it, you know, there's there's a lot of potential to introduce, you know, practices that that, do reduce emissions. And there's a lot of interest in looking at, you know, feed management, for for livestock. And there's there are ways to kinda change the the amount of emissions, that comes out of Macau, through through feed. And, so there yeah. There's attention being put to that, and manure management as well. But on the other side of it so, you know, we can look at, we look at emissions and, you know, a lot of that's associated with livestock, but there's a lot of net sequestration that's coming from agricultural land and also associated with those, livestock operations. So these are estimates for, the carbon that's sequestered through the conservation practices that have been implemented for water quality. And again, there's this kind of, you know, co benefit that comes from things that help water quality are also oftentimes associated with sequestration of carbon. And so that over this three year period, if we take the maximum amounts of so the other thing is there's variability here in in measurement. So depending on the time of year you're measuring or a change of practice that could happen on that land. Right? You could have a change in the amount of carbon that's sequestered. Also, soil depth, there's different there's variations of where you're measuring. So there's still a lot of, like, variation, in these estimates. But the the overall message is that, is that these soils do sequester carbon. And if we take the max value, the practices implemented for water quality would would have a net sequestration impact of equivalent to taking almost seven thousand cars off of the roads in Vermont. So these are real, you know, very significant carbon reductions, carbon sequestration that can come from agricultural land. So, you know, ag land again has a really important role to play in meeting climate goals for the state. [Annie ]: Can let me just make a a note to come back at some point to dig into this a little bit more, like, which practices are guiding the most? [Jake Claro ]: Ryan Patch at the agency is is the perfect person to talk about this. Also, yeah, there's some UVM researchers that have done a lot of work and a woman, Alyssa Matt, Alyssa White, who's now at American Farmland Trust, did a lot of survey work for sort of state of soil quality in Vermont, and that work provided a lot of estimates for not only and I'll talk about this in the next slide, not only for, like, organic matter and phosphorus, but also for carbon. So she's got a wealth of knowledge too. But, I think, you know, Ryan was probably in some ways associated working on that too, so he could he could speak to a lot of this. And and the AC has more and has more data on this and more estimates around those specific practices. Yeah. [Representative O'Brien ]: I I just wondered if, you know, thinking of agriculture in general, I have no idea whether if we added up, say, all the c o two emissions from tractors and trucks versus just the off gassing and methane from all our livestock, like Mhmm. Which is, you know, far worse, you know, in that way. I have no idea. [Annie ]: Let's see. Let's give that, Jake, the chance to [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. I think going back to this slide is I mean, just considering the overall estimated emissions of agriculture being about sixteen percent and then transportation right now being the the second largest contributor to emissions at thirty five point six percent. So now that doesn't compare, like, a one to one, like, a vehicle versus a, you know, a cow and [Representative O'Brien ]: Right. But [Jake Claro ]: also consider that agriculture is, like, what, twenty, like, twenty percent of the land base. So, you know, on a per acre basis, the greenhouse gas emissions contribution is pretty low. So you know, you start converting that land into development and that brings a whole host of new emissions potential on a per acre basis. And so, yeah, there's obviously a lot of complexity of, like, in variables that you could change to impact those Right. Estimates. Just from [Representative O'Brien ]: a policy standpoint, right, would it make more sense to go electric with our farming, you know, fleets or I see what you're saying. Make more sense to transition to non or non livestock farming. Right. [Annie ]: Right. Yeah. So why don't we get representative Nelson's question? And I'm just looking and making so Yeah. And we'll Yeah. We're almost Yeah. We'll we'll then maybe let you finish up the few slides that are left in this presentation and take a break. Yep. Okay. Good. [Representative Nelson ]: Industry our industry has a real interest and actually being able to measure [Representative O'Brien ]: Yeah. [Representative Nelson ]: What our carbon footprint is between, you know, what we output and what we sequester. [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. [Representative Nelson ]: And and I mean, looking at all of it, our ag land, our soils, our our our timber that we own, and we we ask the question and people go, you know, it it would be nice for us to know what other additional practices we can take because what a selling point would be, you know, you buy our milk, we have, you know, a share of carbon footprint or a negative carbon footprint. So industry really would like to know where that is. [Jake Claro ]: Yeah. And I I definitely care. I definitely think that Brian could provide some really good insight on that because and there's a lot of questions around the accounting for this because agriculture is unique as a land use type in its potential to sequester in the way that the state is accounting for emissions reductions targets does not it's a gross emissions target, so it doesn't account for, the sequestration potential. But I think if you look at that potential, you know, agricultural land could could potentially sequester the amount of carbon needed in order to meet our net of, like, net emissions goals. And so one thing I I yeah. Sort of get into this just a little bit more, but one thing that's interesting about this is just at so, yeah, this group that, Alyssa White was involved with, doing this, like, state of soil health in Vermont, which is a twenty twenty two report. They looked at a number of different types of management scenarios that also included nutrient management and some other things. But one of the things they also took a look at was there's a an association of soil organic matter and carbon that's sequestered. And what they looked at and analyzed was if if there was a zero point one percent increase in soil organic matter per year on corn and hay fields, that would that would meet the agricultural, reduction targets alone, and actually exceed. And it would not only meet it for, the the near term targets, but also for the twenty fifty reduction levels. So soil, you know, soil management, soil organic matter, is is a really critical component, to our climate future, and our water quality future. And so there's, again, just the real cost, you know, I think it costs efficiency, and and a huge potential, that is still, you know, a lot of really good great work that's happened here, but a lot of great work can still continue. And then just the last yeah. So shifting kind of the gears here to now just to to touch upon food access and security. I think this committee has heard from a number of folks who work in this in this world. And so I'm really gonna try to just reiterate some key points. But you know food insecurity rate, there's there's been a lot of recent activity in in measuring this in the state of Vermont. USDA has been the sole source for this data historically and consistently provides estimates. So these are each of these data points too is a three year rolling average. It's just another thing to account for. But the the thing that I think is interesting in this trend line is that, you know, great recession. We see a a huge uptick in the food insecurity rate. COVID nineteen, we see actually a measure decrease by USDA. So why why is that? Well, over the period of during COVID, the SNAP benefits per participant through, you know, the the COVID, funding, increased a hundred and two percent. So, from a hundred and twenty two dollars on average to two hundred and forty seven dollars in twenty twenty one. Now as that funding is starting to go away, the the food insecurity rate now is starting to increase again. And what I would say as well around this is that the nine point two percent for twenty twenty three, remember that's a rolling, that's a rolling average. So it's likely that the individual twenty twenty three year is higher than the nine point two percent. And this is a bit of an early warning of probably the twenty twenty four percentage will be higher because it's going to include larger numbers in that three year average. So I think, yeah, just to just to take that into account is probably this nine point two percent is a is a lower kind of estimate than the actual value because it lags behind the current year because it's a three year average. So, you know, we know a lot of Vermonters, you know, are struggling and and and inflation inflationary pressures are are also definitely an important factor here. And then this is research from Meredith Niles, who I think sent it to the committee. And so, yeah, just reiterating this point of there are a number of factors that present challenges for food access, but the the most clear one between a food secure person and someone who's reporting as food insecure is a lack of money. And, you know, we we saw in that previous slide that as benefits increase is available fund as funds become available to a person or a household, the food insecurity rate, declines. Now, of course, you know, you could consider there's, you know, sort of SNAP benefit increases. And there's also this is a conversation too around wages and economic development because as people obviously are earning more, you know, they they have more resources to provide to their families. So, you know, lack of money is is a, obviously, a very significant driver of this. But there are some other factors, transportation, locations that are open or available, you know, accessible, and and some other other factors too. And then, you know, USDA does certain measurements, but also that Meredith Niles and a research team tracked food insecurity among Vermonters over COVID. And this was a population that was representative demographically, but did have a higher rate of food insecurity than the general Vermont population. But you could see in that population that kind of a similar trend of, you know, when COVID first came, those those people being vulnerable to food insecurity as more stimulus dollars came to the state that the rates started to decline. And then as those dollars recede and inflation increases, food insecurity rates increase. So also insecurity is is not there's variation in what types of populations experience it. You know, it's not a it's it's not something, you know, an average includes a lot of different values that go into it. So, if if you look at it by race and ethnicity, people two or more races experience food insecurity at higher rates. And and basically, you know, most non white populations experience food insecurity at higher rates than than the average. And then we can also look at this for LGBTQ plus. This was New England, but beyond being straight and and male, essentially, all other pop, populations here, experience food insecurity higher than, higher than the average. So, you know, different populations experience food insecurity at different rates. So it's not something that you can just think through and and think about through, you know, one lens. There's there's a lot of nuance and complexity to thinking about how to address food insecurity across these different populations. And, and also, disability status as well as a huge factor in predicting whether or not a household will be experiencing food insecurity. So, yeah, pretty pretty clear across the board that these different factors are predictors of whether or not someone will be higher than average. And I think that is I think that is it. Yeah. [Annie ]: K. Thank you, Jake. Yeah. Thank you. You're thank you, Jake. I know that it's a lot of information, and just speaking that much can be as often. So [Jake Claro ]: My mouth is very dry. [Annie ]: Well, our break is as much for you as it is for us. Would ten minutes be a good break, Matt, time? K. Tell them about Alright. Well, let's let's pause then.

Play Clip Play Full Video Pause

SmartTranscript of House Agriculture – 2025-01-24 –10:00AM

This is useful for seeing what happened at the meeting without wading through the whole transcript: