6
CapitalPress.com
Editorials are written by or
approved by members of the
Capital Press Editorial Board.
Friday, September 10, 2021
All other commentary pieces are
the opinions of the authors but
not necessarily this newspaper.
Opinion
Editor & Publisher
Managing Editor
Joe Beach
Carl Sampson
opinions@capitalpress.com | CapitalPress.com/opinion
Our View
What are foreign investors doing with U.S. farmland?
F
or decades there have been
concerns that foreign inves-
tors are buying up farmland
in the United States.
That this is a hot-button issue for
American producers and a strate-
gic policy concern for politicians is
understandable. Wealthy foreign buy-
ers make it harder for domestic pro-
ducers to compete for available farm-
land. Well-heeled investors of all
types always push out smaller poten-
tial buyers. The thought of some
foreign actor taking control of the
domestic food supply is frightening.
There’s no doubt that foreign
investors are interested in snapping
up American farmland. We are more
concerned with what foreign inves-
tors are doing with the farmland they
buy than we are that they are buying
it in the first place.
Our reporting of USDA data
shows that in the 40 years or so that
records have been kept, foreign
investors have bought more than 35
million acres of U.S. farmland worth
Sierra Dawn McClain/Capital Press
A historic barn near the Teton Moun-
tains in Wyoming. Neighboring Teton
County, Idaho, has seen huge foreign
investments in farmland.
$62 billion. In all, that’s an area
larger than the state of New York.
According to USDA staff, outside
investments are on the rise. Filings
show foreign holdings of American
farmland increased by 141% between
2004 and 2019.
In 1978, Congress passed the Agri-
cultural Foreign Investment Disclo-
sure Act, which required foreign buy-
ers to report their transactions.
Foreign buyers have purchased
1.2 million acres of Oregon farmland
— roughly 7.5% of the state’s farm
acreage, according to the 2017 U.S.
Census of Agriculture. The total is
1.5 million acres in Washington, and
just 122,598 acres in Idaho.
The takeover of American farm
production by foreigners is far from
imminent. Their purchases in the
last 40 years are equal to 3.9% of the
farmland now in production.
Critics are convinced that the
reported numbers are low, and con-
tend without proof that much more
land is being bought than is being
reported. They concede that it
would impossible to quantify with-
out combing through land records in
3,000 county courthouses across the
country.
It is certain that the USDA’s num-
bers are misleading. Some of the land
in question has been sold by one for-
eign buyer to another, while oth-
ers have divested altogether. Track-
ing those transactions through USDA
data is difficult. Also, not all foreign
investors who have reported a pur-
chase have a controlling interest in
the land.
We agree that foreign purchases
should be monitored. It would be a
dangerous problem if foreign inter-
ests gain control of U.S. agriculture.
To be clear, we would prefer that
U.S. farmland stay in the hands, or at
least the control, of U.S. entities. But,
the more pressing concern is keeping
farmland productive.
Foreign investors are joining
domestic companies that are inter-
ested in building alternative energy
facilities or other real estate develop-
ments on farmland.
Turning cropland into windfarms,
shopping malls and subdivisions is a
greater danger to agriculture, and in
turn the country, than a French com-
pany buying vineyards here to make
wine.
Once farmland is built over, it’s
gone for good. No farmer, foreign or
domestic, will ever farm it again.
Oregon
legislators see
bipartisan
path forward
on climate
Our View
A
Raley’s
Raley’s Supermarket displays “ugly” produce under the Real Good brand. Ugly produce, which is food that has cosmetic
blemishes but is otherwise OK, has gained popularity lately as a means of reducing food waste.
Reducing food waste
a worthy effort
ne issue we can all agree on is that food
plan estimates a total annual “net financial benefit” of
$1 billion.
shouldn’t be wasted. Too much time, effort
Some of the plan’s recommendations are common
and money goes into growing food for it to be
sense. For example, it calls for nationally clarifying the
casually tossed into the garbage.
“use by” dates on packaged foods. Many consumers are
Farmers and ranchers have long been among the
confused by those labels and toss out perfectly good food
best of food recyclers. Vegetables, fruits — and even
just because the date has passed.
candy — are repurposed as livestock feed. Organic
The plan also points out that low-grade produce —
waste is composted or goes into anaerobic digesters to
known as “ugly” food — can be used by food banks and
be turned into natural gas to generate electricity. Every
other organizations to feed those in need.
part of a cow, pig or sheep is put to good use when it is
The plan also calls for the Washington Legislature to
slaughtered.
pass a state tax credit for food
Even the grain left over from
donations.
making beer are fed to cattle.
Then the plan pivots away from
Grocery stores also offer day-
feeding
people and into feeding
old bread and other edibles to
the state bureaucracy. It proposes a
area food banks and others who
Washington Center of Sustainable
feed those in need.
Food Management. Housed in the
At the same time, it is scan-
Department of Ecology, it would
dalous to see the amount of food
have a website and work with
that goes into the trash at some
school lunch rooms. Cartons of
Amy Gillette/Oregon Food Bank other levels of government and the
A
crew
harvests
potatoes
that were donated to public to reduce food waste.
milk — unopened — are tossed,
a
food
bank.
The plan also would spend
along with other foods that go
between $76 million and $497
uneaten.
million a year on these and other efforts.
Such waste hurts the students, who are missing out on
Once the bureaucracy is expanded, the planners would
nutritious meals — and taxpayers’ pocketbooks.
create
what it calls “levers” and ban food waste from land-
Comes now a plan from the folks at the Washington
fills or create incentives to stop it.
Department of Ecology to figure out ways to reduce the
Other suggestions are more farm-to-school programs,
amount of food that goes into the garbage. The idea is
incentives
for value-added food processors, setting up
supported by the state Legislature.
In 2015, Washingtonians generated more than 1.1 mil- community food hubs for farmers and others to use and
more anaerobic digesters.
lion tons of food waste, according to the department’s
Most of this is good stuff. So good that it’s already
“Use Food Well Washington Plan.” The plan calls for
being done in many places in Washington and elsewhere.
cutting that number in half by preventing people from
Growers and processors long ago partnered with food
wasting food, “rescuing” edible food to make sure it gets
banks and other organizations to help feed the hungry and
to the people who need it and “recovering” inedible food
prevent food waste. It’s good to see the state of Washing-
waste for animal feed, energy production, composting
ton get on board, but it needs to find less expensive ways
and other means.
If the food waste reduction goal is met by 2030 the
to do it.
O
s the Oregon legislature ended its 2021
session, an epic heat wave hit the Pacific
Northwest, punctuating the importance of
a bipartisan breakthrough for climate.
A substantial number of Oregon Republican
legislators joined majority Democratic support for
a carbon fee and dividend policy at the national
level. Senate Joint
Memorial 5, asking
GUEST
Congress to pass
VIEW
the Energy Inno-
Elizabeth
vation and Carbon
Graser-
Dividend Act (cur-
Lindsey
rently HR 2307)
passed the Oregon
Senate in April with
a majority of Republicans joining all Democratic
senators.
In the House, over half of the representatives
co-sponsored it, including two-thirds of Demo-
crats and a third of Republicans. An additional
10% had already endorsed the federal act. (The
bill didn’t come to a vote in the Oregon House
despite the clear majority support.)
The epic June 26-28 heat wave brought home
how agriculture and natural resource operations
are facing increasing, severe effects from climate
change in the Pacific Northwest. On my farm
near Oregon City the heat wave killed chickens,
stressed the goats and killed some of the blue-
berry and raspberry crops, causing a personal “red
alert.” My husband and I are wondering how our
farm can remain productive with continued heat
waves and drought.
Our experience mirrored UN Secretary-Gen-
eral António Guterres’ assessment of the recently
released Intergovernmental Panel on Cli-
mate Change report, calling it “a code red for
humanity.”
The magnitude of the challenges to agriculture
and natural resources in the past year highlights
the urgent need for climate solutions that protect
the agricultural and natural resource industry in
the Pacific Northwest. Because solutions can be
slow to implement and to achieve reductions of
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emis-
sions, quickly initiated and quick acting solutions
are needed. Bi-partisan solutions are needed to
bypass the partisan infighting and to allow stable
solutions continued when either party is in power.
The carbon fee with border adjustment and
dividend approach is simple and effective.
The gradually-increasing fee on fossil fuels is
applied at the well, mine or border to provide the
financial incentive to nudge the economy towards
non-emitting practices with this clear and predict-
able market signal. The dividend evenly returns
the money to all Americans as a monthly payment
without growing government thereby protect-
ing poor and middle income Americans from the
increased cost. Agricultural diesel is exempt from
the fee. The border adjustment keeps the fee from
disadvantaging American industry in the face of
international competition. And many economists
and computer models see the fee being the sin-
gle most important step getting us to being carbon
neutral by 2050, as science says is necessary.
A strong and bipartisan majority of Oregon’s
legislators recognize carbon fee and dividend as a
fair and needed way to solve the climate impacts
on us. They join a growing, bipartisan, nationwide
recognition. It’s time for Congress to take note
and take urgent action.
Elizabeth Graser-Lindsey is a Citizens’ Cli-
mate Lobby volunteer and with her husband owns
and operates a small farm in Beavercreek, Ore.