U.S. Department of Agriculture

DOJ, USDA Ramp Up Antitrust Investigation Into "Big 4" Beef Packers

Fri, 08 May 2026 18:34:38 GMT

The Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Agriculture are intensifying scrutiny of concentration and pricing practices across the meat industry, announcing this week that federal investigators are ramping up a criminal antitrust investigation into the nation’s four largest beef packers.

During a joint press conference Monday at DOJ headquarters, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche framed the effort as part of a broader push to address competition issues in agriculture and food pricing.

“Today we are here to talk about our progress here at the Justice Department to hold meat packers accountable,” Blanche says.

Federal officials allege price-fixing and collusion may have contributed to higher meat prices for consumers, while also limiting competition within the cattle industry.

“We prioritized investigating potential antitrust violations in U.S. cattle and beef markets,” Blanche says. “In the beef industry, the Big Four processors control over 85% of the beef processing market. Two of the Big Four are primarily foreign-owned.”

The “Big Four” — referenced during the press conference — are JBS, Cargill, Tyson and National Beef. The administration argues the current structure of the meat industry allows competitors to exchange competitively sensitive information across the protein sector — practices DOJ says it is now investigating.

DOJ Encourages Whistleblowers to Come Forward

Blanche also encourages whistleblowers within the meatpacking industry to provide information to federal investigators. DOJ says individuals who provide information leading to antitrust convictions or major enforcement actions could qualify for financial rewards.

“The idea of whistleblowers of people coming forward with information they have is one of the best and most efficient ways that we can solve antitrust violations criminally or otherwise,” he says. “And so we just want to make sure people realize that people in this industry realize that we’re putting money where our mouth is. We’re not asking you to come forward and then see what happens. We’re saying if you come forward and if your information results in a finding, in a conviction, and the amount of money is over a million dollars, which in this industry is not a very high bar, that you stand to recover up to 30%. And so we have to incentivize people to make a very difficult choice and come forward with information if they had it.”

R-CALF USA Applauds Investigation

R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard says the biggest takeaway from Monday’s announcement is that DOJ is actively seeking public assistance through its antitrust whistleblower program.

“The biggest takeaway was that the Department of Justice is reaching out to the public seeking help through DOJ’s antitrust whistleblower program, to find out what the public knows
about these anticompetitive practices,” Bullard says.

Bullard says R-CALF USA has spent years warning policymakers about growing concentration in the cattle industry.

“We’ve been calling attention and warning that this is a threat to our national security, our economy, and particularly to our food safety here and food security in the United States,” Bullard says.

Rollins Links Herd Decline to Regulatory Pressure

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins also focused heavily on the shrinking U.S. cattle herd and declining number of ranchers during Monday’s event.

“In the past decade alone, we’ve lost over 17% of our cattle ranchers,” Rollins says. “More than 100,000 ranches across this country are no more.”

“The low herd size inherited by the Trump administration can be attributed to a variety of factors,” she says. “The biggest one, at least from our perspective, is the radical left’s ongoing assault against ranching as a way of life.”

Today, just four companies — JBS, Cargill, Tyson Foods, and National Beef — control roughly 85% of the cattle processing market. That level of concentration has surged from just 25% in 1977 to 71% by 1992, and now to an astonishing 85%.

Together, these companies operate through… pic.twitter.com/s4naYFcjt7
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) May 4, 2026

Rollins argues drought alone is not responsible for cattle liquidation.

“For years, they used climate alarmism to wage a war on cattle in America,” Rollins says. “And when you pair that with droughts, wildfire, overregulation from previous administrations and volatile markets, this is how we have ended up here today.”

The administration also outlined several policy initiatives it says are designed to support cattle producers, including:

Opening more federal land for grazing
Implementing new “Product of USA” labeling rules
Supporting small processors through a grading pilot program
Updating dietary guidelines to emphasize the role of meat in the American diet

Rollins says additional announcements are expected later this week.

Agri Stats Settlement Targets Information Sharing

The DOJ’s broader push against anticompetitive behavior escalated Thursday when the department announced a proposed settlement with Agri Stats .

Federal officials accuse the company of helping major meat processors share confidential pricing and production data involving chicken, pork and turkey markets for decades.

Under the proposed settlement , Agri Stats would be prohibited from continuing several data-sharing practices DOJ alleges distorted competition and increased prices.

The agreement would also increase market transparency by making more information available to buyers and sellers throughout the supply chain.

Although the Agri Stats case does not involve beef, Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing Peter Navarro referenced the pending settlement during Monday’s press conference.

“This is like the mathematician’s worst nightmare in terms of monopoly behavior,” Navarro says. “Basically, what the companies in this concentrated industry were doing was individually sending in data on everything, consumers, production, everything in between. And what did that computer do? It spit back what the monopoly price should be.”

With the settlement he explains, “Justice Department said no more. That’s not going to happen on our watch and that case I believe is going to be settled well or at trial in a way which not only will take care of that problem but implicate some of the bad actions that we’ve seen by the two American companies Tyson and Cargill and JBS on the Brazilian side along with National Beef.”

1 – The Department of Justice continues to bring affordability to the American people. Today, we announced a historic settlement with Agri Stats, whose business model directly raised the price of chicken, turkey, and pork in local grocery stores across our nation. 🐔🐖⚖️
— Acting AG Todd Blanche (@DAGToddBlanche) May 7, 2026

On X, Blanche says the settlement will create a more level playing field by making Agri Stats reports available to all buyers and sellers and calls it part of the administration’s broader push to fight anticompetitive behavior in the food supply chain.

Rollins also confirms the DOJ antitrust investigation into meatpackers originally announced in November remains ongoing.

“As ranchers face fewer options for selling their animals, the Big Four grow stronger and stronger,” Rollins says. “These companies now have an unprecedented ability to wield market power and influence prices paid for cattle — definitely more so than if we had greater competition.”

Industry Analysts Push Back on Concentration Claims

Not everyone in the cattle industry agrees that concentration itself is evidence of anticompetitive conduct.

John Nalivka, president of Sterling Marketing, says consolidation largely reflects economics and efficiency within the packing sector.

“As a business, you have to continually look to lowering costs,” Nalivka says. “And you can manage costs and you can manage revenue both. But the cost, you can have a direct impact on your cost structure. And one way of doing this, consolidating and gaining greater capacity and economies of scale.”

Nalivka also disputes the administration’s market concentration figures.

(Sterling Marketing Inc.)

“Well, to begin with, it’s not 85% now, it’s something more close to 78%, or even maybe a little bit lower than that when the Greeley strike was on,” he says.
The timing of the investigation is notable as packer profitability remains under pressure.

Nalivka says Sterling Marketing’s profit tracker showed beef packers losing nearly $200 per head at the end of April.

“From 2011 to 2015, we had the same set of circumstances, significant herd liquidation and pulling the numbers down,” Nalivka says. “And with the packing plant, the capacity is driven by — and I generate the numbers based on slaughter capacity — so it’s all about cattle numbers.”

Nalivka says his data shows the market share of the four largest beef packers has declined in 2026, with Tyson Foods’ share decreasing.

(Sterling Marketing Inc.)

According to Nalivka, the four largest beef packers now account for approximately 73% of fed-cattle slaughter capacity, leaving nearly one-quarter of processing capacity outside what the administration refers to as the “Big Four.”

“I have told people who have made these comments about these big bad packers,” Nalivka says. “I’ve said, first of all, I’ll start out with a statement, what would you do if you didn’t have one, a packer? And secondly, if you think it’s easy and you think you know so much about it, go build one.”

Producers Need Packers

Justin Tupper, U.S. Cattlemen’s Association president, says the DOJ action is less a brand-new effort than a continuation of long-running scrutiny. Tupper was a guest on AgriTalk Thursday .

Tupper acknowledges the seriousness of DOJ’s work, saying, “I sure do” believe they’re ramping it up, and called the probe “long-awaited and long-needed.” But he repeatedly warns about unintended consequences for producers if the investigation disrupts slaughter capacity.

“We like to vilify the packers all the time, but there is one truth to it, we need them,” he says, adding that if a major plant closed, it, “would cause more disruption than any good that could come from it.”

His concern is when cattle numbers rebuild, predicting, “When we get back to cattle numbers that they can control us, then they’re going to use that and weaponize that against us.”

Tupper stresses producers are not trying to deny packers a profit. “All we want as cattle producers is a fair shake; we don’t want to be used and abused when the cattle numbers are high.”

He warns the administration must understand “how tight that supply is and how few of places that slaughter them” and avoid “big disruptions.” He calls for thoughtful, balanced solutions developed with “cool heads and a lot of the smart people in the room” so the investigation doesn’t “disrupt the chain.”

Calls for Structural Reform Continue

Bullard says R-CALF USA continues pushing for significant structural reforms in the cattle industry.

“We’re asking them to do one of two things,” Bullard says. “Either break up the packers to provide more competition within the industry, or regulate those packers to ensure that they don’t engage in the antitrust conduct and anti-competitive practices.”

Bullard says the group is also urging the Trump administration to investigate what it describes as a “formula pricing scheme,” where cattle are increasingly sold through contracts instead of negotiated cash markets.

Critics argue those arrangements give major meatpackers greater influence over cattle pricing.

When asked whether the administration is listening to cattle producers’ concerns, Bullard points to Monday’s press conference as evidence of a major shift in Washington.

“Well, clearly it is,” Bullard says. “The press conference that was held talking specifically about the problems associated with beef packer concentration was unprecedented for the past 100 years. We have not seen our policymakers stand up and take a stand against the concentration of the cattle market. And so we’re excited that this administration is focused on this issue, understands that it is a national security issue, understands that as a result of our failure to properly enforce our antitrust laws, we’ve hollowed out rural American communities all across this country.”

Whether the federal investigation ultimately leads to major reforms within the cattle industry remains uncertain. But the debate over market concentration, competition and who controls pricing power in the U.S. cattle market is now squarely at the center of Washington policymaking.

Your Next Reads:

Not Done Yet: Despite Packer Investigation Price Shock, Cattle Prices Could Keep Climbing Through 2030

Tue, 05 May 2026 16:12:15 GMT

Fresh policy headlines injected new uncertainty into cattle markets this week, but they haven’t changed the bigger picture driving beef prices higher.

On Monday, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced an intensified antitrust investigation into the so-called “Big Four” packers — JBS, Cargill, Tyson Foods and National Beef — which together process the vast majority of U.S. cattle. The probe, which the Trump administration says includes millions of documents and a push for whistleblower testimony, underscores growing concern in Washington over market concentration, pricing behavior and the impact on both producers and consumers.

That news sent cattle prices sharply lower.

While policy developments like Monday’s news can dominate the markets on any given day, they don’t necessarily alter the deeper supply-and-demand forces shaping the cattle market. And right now, those forces remain firmly intact: Record-high beef demand and historically low cattle supplies mean these strong cattle prices aren’t just here, but they may be here to stay through the end of the decade.

Cattle Prices Not Done Climbing Yet

Oklahoma State Extension livestock economist Derrell Peel says he’s never been this bullish for this long. And the reason is such strong fundamentals at play. The market’s direction is still being driven far more by biology and consumer behavior than by policy headlines. And while the investigation may shape the industry over time, it does not immediately create more cattle or reduce beef demand, which are two factors that remain at the core of today’s price strength.

The result is a market where short-term volatility — whether sparked by policy, disease concerns or geopolitical events — continues to play out against a longer-term bullish trend. And as long as supplies stay tight and consumers keep buying beef, the broader trajectory points toward the same conclusion: Cattle prices may not be done climbing yet.

What makes the current environment so unusual is not just the volatility in cattle prices, but how long demand has held together despite those increases. Consumers have continued to buy beef even as retail prices climb and supplies tighten, resisting the typical shift toward lower-cost proteins like pork or chicken. That resilience has been a cornerstone of the market’s strength, helping sustain the rally even as production constraints persist.

The Supply Side of the Story

Even with that looming concern, the supply side of the equation continues to dominate the broader market narrative. In fact, one of the most striking aspects of the current cycle is how little progress has been made toward rebuilding the U.S. cattle herd, despite strong price incentives that would typically encourage expansion.

“This is the longest in my entire career that I’ve basically had the same outlook,” Peel says. “This thing really started in the fall of 2022, as far as the current price run that we’re on. It continues. And the story hasn’t changed, and we really haven’t changed anything yet that sets up the idea that it’s going to change anytime soon.”

That consistency reflects a deeper theme within the industry. While high prices might suggest an imminent increase in production, the biological and economic realities of cattle production make rapid expansion difficult, especially when producers remain cautious.

“Very, very limited at this point — so essentially no,” Peel says when asked if there are signs the U.S. cattle herd is starting to rebuild. “I mean, we just have very limited indications of a little bit of interest in heifer retention, but not a lot happening yet. We’re watching the weather at springtime. There’s a lot of concern about drought conditions that could derail anything we might want to do anyway.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by U.S. Farm Report (@usfarmreport)

Without meaningful heifer retention, Peel explains the process of herd rebuilding cannot truly begin. And until that process starts, he thinks the market remains locked in a pattern of tight supplies and upward price pressure.

“The bottom line is we really haven’t started the clock yet on the things that would eventually lead to a top in this market,” Peel says.

That delay has pushed expectations further into the future, extending the timeline for when increased production might finally ease the market. Each passing season without expansion reinforces the same dynamic: limited supply supporting prices.

“Oh, yeah, we keep pushing it out,” Peel says. “You know, I’ve already extended it probably two years. We’re still waiting again for that clock to start at this point. So until we see some definitive signs of substantial amount of heifer retention, you know, the path continues as it is.”

Even if producers were to begin retaining heifers immediately, the lag time between that decision and its impact on beef production would stretch for years. That built-in delay is a defining feature of the cattle cycle and one reason why price trends tend to persist once they are established.

“And it’ll be some months after that,” Peel says. “Typically, a year to a year and a half after we start heifer retention would be when we would expect these markets to peak out. So we’re on a timeline now where, if we start saving heifers right now, it’s going to be the end of the decade before we really change overall beef production significantly.”

The Bullish Run in Cattle: How Long Can It Last?

That long runway helps explain why Peel remains firmly bullish — even at today’s record price levels. In his view, the market simply hasn’t reached the point where supply can begin to catch up with demand.

“Still predicting higher highs, as scary as that is for me to say,” Peel says. “We’re at record-high prices, and I expect that we’re going to go higher. I don’t think the peak in prices happens in 2026. I think it’s somewhere after that.”

Those supply constraints and demand dynamics point toward a market that could remain elevated well into the latter part of the decade.

“It’s really hard to say right now until we sort of know how it’s playing out,” Peel says, referring to how the eventual peak might unfold. “It’s all really kind of ahead of us as far as that goes. I don’t see it happening. We’re on such a slow build that I think it’s going to be more of a measured approach rather than a sharp peak.”

Still Some Uncertainty Ahead

Still, while the long-term outlook remains bullish, the short-term environment is anything but stable. Day-to-day market action continues to be shaped by uncertainty, with external shocks triggering rapid price swings that can complicate marketing decisions for producers.

“In the meantime, we’re dealing with a lot of risk and uncertainty in this market,” Peel says. “So we’re in this unusual situation where we have a bullish outlook and yet a really strong need for producers to be doing risk management just because the market is so volatile on a short-term basis.”

One Risk: High Gas Prices

One of those risks is the fact outside economic pressures are beginning to build. Gas prices recently jumped 33¢ in a single week, reaching their highest level since July 2022. While that may seem disconnected from cattle markets at first glance, fuel costs play a direct role in shaping consumer purchasing power, especially when increases persist over time.

“Economists define demand as willingness and ability to purchase products,” Peel says. “The willingness is there. But the ability, high gas prices is probably the biggest threat out there.”

That distinction between willingness and ability is critical to understanding where the beef market could be headed next. So far, consumers have shown little hesitation in purchasing beef, even at elevated price levels. However, sustained increases in everyday expenses like fuel can gradually erode disposable income, forcing households to make tougher decisions at the meat counter.

“If the current geopolitical situation persists and keeps gas prices high for another few months, at some point in time it may impact consumer incomes enough that it forces them to make more adjustments,” Peel adds. “And that would be the biggest threat to beef demand at this point.”

That potential shift has not yet materialized, but it represents one of the few risks to an otherwise bullish outlook. For now, demand remains strong, helping support prices even as supplies remain historically tight. But the longer external cost pressures linger, the more likely it becomes that consumer behavior could begin to change.

New World Screwworm Risk

Animal health concerns have been one of the more visible drivers of that volatility, particularly when it comes to New World screwworm . Even unconfirmed reports or isolated cases have proven capable of moving markets, highlighting just how sensitive current conditions are to uncertainty.

“These animal health issues are certainly one of them,” Peel says. “We’ve got a lot of things going on right now that are kind of like that. We get news, and markets don’t like uncertainty. And so that’s what we’re dealing with here.”

Peel says in some cases, the uncertainty is worse than the reality, which means the market is even more sensitive to any type of news.

“But the market is also very resilient. So when we do see these impacts, whether it’s from New World screwworm or concerns about infrastructure or geopolitical events, whatever it is, the market tends to react, but then it bounces back pretty quickly,” he points out.

But for producers, Peel says volatility is a major risk.

“And the challenge for producers is to not get caught where you have to be marketing something in the middle of one of these short-term shocks in the market,” he says. “And so that’s the challenge for them to try to manage around that volatility.”

Is the U.S. Prepared?

From a policy and preparedness standpoint, Amy Hagerman, Extension specialist for agriculture and food policy at Oklahoma State University, emphasizes risks like New World screwworm extend beyond cattle imports alone. The pathways for introduction are broader, requiring a more comprehensive approach to monitoring and response.

“This is a pest that likes anything that’s warm-blooded,” Hagerman says. “And so it’s going to catch a ride with anybody that it can catch a ride with.”

Yet, there’s a general assumption that even though the Southern border remains closed to live cattle imports, that if NWS enters the U.S., it won’t be because of cattle. Instead, it could enter the U.S. via wildlife or something else.

“I think a higher level of awareness, education and vigilance is really important, whether we’re talking about pets for somebody who has vacationed in Mexico, or even individuals, or whether we’re talking about wildlife,” Hagerman says. “We’ve seen a real effort, publicly and privately, to kind of enhance that awareness.”

The latest NWS case, according to Hagerman, is less than 70 miles from the U.S. border and points to the urgency of ongoing monitoring efforts in the region.

“As somebody who does a lot of emergency preparedness, I can tell you that all plans never survive interaction with reality,” she says. “But I do think we’ve put a lot of effort, a lot of time into preparing for this — setting up the infrastructure and educating producers because this is going to be a producer-management issue by and large.”

Possible Permanent Changes of Flow of Cattle From Mexico to the U.S.

Peel adds that while such issues may be costly and complex at the individual level, their broader market impact may be limited compared to supply fundamentals.

“I think the risk here for the impact of New World screwworm is not so much a broader market one, because it’s going to be a very costly issue for producers individually to manage, for regional efforts to control it,” Peel says. “It’s probably not going to impact the overall market all that much.”

Beyond animal health, trade policy remains another uncertain variable. The continued closure of the southern border to live cattle imports has already reshaped supply flows, and prolonged disruption could lead to more permanent structural changes.

“I think we could,” Peel says when asked whether trade patterns might shift for good. “I mean, arguably the biggest impacts of all of this in terms of the economic impact of the border being closed, we’ve already felt up to this point.”

“You know, we probably didn’t get 700,000 or 800,000 head of Mexican cattle last year that we would have gotten,” Peel adds. “And so, you know, we’re past that now, but the thing is, those cattle have been dealt with. They’re using them in Mexico. They have infrastructure to utilize those cattle in their domestic market.”

Peel says the longer this goes on, the more supply chains and production systems need to adjust to the fact the normal or historic trade flows have changed.

“The risk is that maybe we lose it permanently. It changes things on a permanent basis,” Peel says.

No matter the day-to-day noise, the market remains defined by a rare combination of strong demand, constrained supply and mounting external pressures. While higher fuel costs could eventually test consumers’ ability to keep paying record prices, the lack of herd expansion continues to underpin a bullish outlook, one that may keep cattle prices elevated through the end of the decade.

Trump Admin to Roll Out Major Fertilizer Plan This Week, Accelerate U.S. Production Push

Mon, 27 Apr 2026 16:36:30 GMT

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins says the Trump administration will unveil a sweeping set of fertilizer initiatives this week, warning that surging input costs are putting intense pressure on American farmers. Speaking at a Missouri farm on Friday, Rollins told those in attendance that fertilizer has become an issue of national security, which is why she says this week’s announcement will be broader than just USDA, also including EPA, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce and Department of the Interior.

While at GR Farms in Higginsville, Mo., on Friday to roll out an announcement on the Supplemental Disaster Relief Program (SDRP) top-up payments, Rollins described the Trump administration’s upcoming announcement on fertilizer as a large-scale investment initiative. She says while she hoped to roll out the plan while in Missouri, the administration is still finalizing the size of the funding package.

Rollins says the plan will address both immediate actions to stabilize fertilizer prices and a longer-term roadmap aimed at ensuring affordable, domestically produced supply for U.S. farmers.

Washington analyst Jim Wiesemeyer says the plan will likely need to include a mix of financial and policy tools, such as grants, tax incentives, loan guarantees outside of existing USDA programs and greater consistency in U.S. trade policy, while noting imports will still play a role, particularly for key nutrients like potash sourced from Canada.

Short-Term Fertilizer Price Pain

During her comments Friday, Rollins highlighted how quickly fertilizer prices have increased since the conflict started in Iran, outlining the additional strain it is placing on producers.

“We know that urea prices have gone up 50% over the last month. Ammonia is up 30% or more,” she said, adding that “our farmers are feeling that pinch.”

Rollins also told the crowd fertilizer has been a longer-term challenge, even before the situation in Iran caused the latest price spike.

“To be clear, this has been a problem for years. The actual numbers are lower, believe it or not, than they were even in 2022,” she says. “But nevertheless, that jump in prices overnight, we have to address.”

Framing the issue as more than just an economic challenge and one that is a matter of national security after decades of offshoring fertilizer production, Rollins says the administration views the issue as part of a broader structural problem within the fertilizer industry.

“The loss of competition in the fertilizer industry has obviously led to higher fertilizer costs over time,” she says. “When combined with what’s happening overseas with the current geopolitical issues facing our world, certainly we have come to a crossroads that requires immediate action. This is indeed a matter of national security, and we are working to tackle it head on.”

Focus on Domestic Fertilizer Production

While Rollins didn’t give details, she hinted the centerpiece of this week’s announcement will be a major push to reshore fertilizer production, backed by federal investment to accomplish that. Working with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, she says the administration is preparing to direct significant funding toward building new fertilizer plants across the country, while also supporting existing projects.

“I have asked Howard to do, and his team to do, and what we’re doing in partnership is to identify a significant number ... that we can deploy into building out fertilizer plants in America,” she says.

Rollins emphasizes cutting regulatory delays will be critical to making that plan work. She says projects are already being identified nationwide, but permitting delays remain a major obstacle — with the goal of getting that process down to months versus the current years it takes.

“We’ve already begun to identify all over the country. Some are under production. How do we move them along more quickly? Some are in the permitting bureaucracy, which sometimes takes years to get through permitting,” she says. “Our goal is to, instead of years, to get to permitting in a matter of weeks, or perhaps months, so that even in one year, two years and three years, we will have facilities up and running that we will never have had that opportunity or option before.”

United States’ Energy Advantage for Nitrogen Fertilizer

Rollins also points to domestic energy resources as a key factor in expanding fertilizer output, particularly for nitrogen production.

“We became, in a matter of just a short period of time, a net exporter of LNG versus importer, meaning we were producing our own energy in America, so much so that we no longer had to rely on other countries,” she says. “The reason that is important is, as our farmers are facing these exponential nitrogen fertilizer costs, we now have the resources in America. We just have to build the facilities, the manufacturing facilities, to turn that LNG into nitrogen. So this is going to happen quicker than you would normally expect, I think because of the pieces of the puzzle that have already been put into place.”

In the meantime, Rollins says the administration is continuing short-term efforts to improve supply availability and reduce costs.

While the longer-term strategy ramps up, she says the administration is continuing short-term interventions to ease pressure on farmers. These include:

Extending a waiver of the Jones Act
Opening new import channels
Working and meeting with industry/fertilizer companies

Highlighting cooperation with domestic producers, she pointed to CF Industries as an example.

“They have said, in order to protect our farmers, we are going to stop maintenance. We are going look at holding our prices steady,” she says.

She also points to ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice.

“Last year, we signed a joint agreement, USDA did, with the Department of Justice, ensuring that farmers have access to competitive and affordable inputs,” she says. “Looking into the activities of our fertilizer companies and what has happened over the last few years, but with a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Long-Term Goal: Reduce Foreign Dependence

Looking longer term, Rollins says the administration is focused on reversing decades of reliance on foreign suppliers.

“America has offshored for far too long, far too much of our fertilizer production, leaving us dangerously reliant on Russia and China,” she says. “Changing that long-standing industry that is reliant on global markets won’t happen overnight,” she says. “But working with our farmers and across industry and government, we will find ways to make fertilizer that we can do here in America and make sure it is a price that our great farmers can afford.”

At the same time, the administration is increasing scrutiny of fertilizer markets. Rollins noted ongoing coordination with the Department of Justice, saying officials are taking “a new eye on potential price gouging right now.”

Ultimately, she framed this week’s announcement as the beginning of a broader shift away from foreign dependence.

Rollins says additional details, including funding levels and project specifics, will be included in next week’s announcement.

“We’re at a crossroads that requires immediate action,” she says.

Watch Rollins’ full press conference here:

USDA Expands Farmer Surveys to Improve Data Accuracy, Relocates Staff Closer to the Farm

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 13:00:55 GMT

USDA is moving to adjust how it collects and communicates agricultural data following an April 22 meeting with stakeholders in Kansas City, pairing expanded farmer surveys, increased transparency efforts and new performance tracking with a sweeping reorganization that will relocate staff closer to agricultural regions.

Leading into the USDA Data Users meeting on Wednesday, Farm Journal spoke one-on-one with USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden. While he wasn’t in the room physically on Wednesday, instead joining virtually, Vaden made clear he intended to play an active role in the discussion.

“I’m excited about that because one of the things that both the Secretary and I are committed to is better transparency, especially when it comes to our data,” he says. “USDA data needs to be the gold standard, and we need to be brave enough to take feedback. Everyone can always improve.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by U.S. Farm Report (@usfarmreport)

That theme, being “brave enough” to hear criticism, carried through both the meeting and the department’s broader outreach effort. As USDA, ERS, NASS, World Board and others participated in a panel on stage followed by Q&A, they had unified message that they’ll do whatever it takes to rebuild farmer trust and restore confidence in USDA data and reporting.

Earlier this month, USDA closed a public comment period inviting anyone who interacts with its data to weigh in on how it could improve.

“What we have done is we had a public comment process which just closed on the 9th of April, where we asked everyone who has any interaction with our data, tell us what you think,” Vaden says. “Are there ways that we can collect data better? Are there ways that we can report data better?”

Data Users Meeting Highlights Concerns Over Participation, Accuracy

At the Kansas City meeting, one issue stood out: falling farmer participation in USDA surveys and what that means for the reliability of widely watched reports.

Officials from USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) acknowledged that response rates have dropped to historically low levels. The March 31 planting intentions report drew responses from just 37.6% of surveyed producers, down from 44.3% a year earlier and the lowest on record. But they also talked about plans to improve those numbers.

That decline has raised concerns across the agriculture sector, particularly after USDA made sizable revisions to 2025 corn acreage estimates earlier this year. Because markets rely heavily on USDA data for price discovery, risk management, and policy decisions, even small questions about accuracy can ripple widely.

In response, NASS plans to significantly expand its farmer survey efforts in an attempt to rebuild participation and improve data quality.

USDA Plans Expanded Farmer Surveys to Improve Data Reliability

According to NASS Administrator Joseph Parsons, the agency intends to increase the number of farmers surveyed for major acreage reports, pending approval from the Office of Management and Budget.

The most immediate change would come with the June 30 acreage report, where USDA plans to boost its sample size by roughly 35%. Additional increases of about 10% are planned for the September, December, and March reports.

The goal is straightforward: generate more usable responses and improve the precision of crop estimates.

Beyond simply expanding outreach, USDA is also working to improve how it communicates uncertainty in its reports. Parsons says the agency will incorporate more “plain language” explanations to help producers, traders, and policymakers better understand confidence levels and potential variability in the data.

Reorganization Announcement Follows Immediately After Data Meeting

Just one day after the Data Users meeting, USDA underscored how quickly change is unfolding across the department by announcing a sweeping reorganization that will relocate major divisions, including positions tied to data and research, out of Washington, D.C.

The agency announced the broad reorganization and relocation of staff, saying it will modernize operations. But some stakeholders warn the changes could strain staffing levels and institutional expertise at data-focused offices, including NASS and the World Agricultural Outlook Board, following recent departures tied to the Deferred Resignation Program.

According to USDA’s Thursday announcement, the overhaul will shift key components of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) and the Research, Education, and Economics (REE) mission area closer to agricultural regions, in what officials describe as an effort to modernize operations and better align staff with the producers they serve.

At the center of the changes is the creation of a new National Food Safety Center in Urbandale, Iowa, which will serve as the primary hub for FSIS administrative, technical, and support functions. The facility is expected to house roughly 200 employees and become the agency’s largest office. A separate science center in Athens, Georgia, will expand capabilities in microbiology, chemistry, and epidemiology.

USDA officials emphasize that frontline inspection operations, which account for roughly 85% of FSIS personnel, will not be affected, and no reductions in force are planned. Additional staff tied to international operations will be located in Fort Collins, Colorado, while about 100 positions will remain in Washington for policy and congressional work.

The restructuring also reaches into the department’s data and research arms.

The Economic Research Service (ERS) and National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) will relocate additional positions to Kansas City, reinforcing a move first initiated during the previous Trump administration. NASS will also shift certain Washington-based roles to St. Louis and other regional offices while maintaining its nationwide data collection network.

Meanwhile, the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) will begin decommissioning the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center in Maryland, redistributing research programs across the country to better align with regional agricultural needs and modernize aging infrastructure.

USDA leaders frame the reorganization as a move to reduce duplication, improve accountability, and strengthen connections between federal agencies and the agricultural sector. Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden says the changes are intended to better align staff with mission needs, while agency leaders emphasize improved workforce support, training, and recruitment.

Greater Transparency and Accountability Ahead

The timing of the reorganization, coming immediately after a meeting focused on data credibility, highlights the broader scope of USDA’s efforts to rebuild trust and improve performance.

Alongside expanded surveys and structural changes, the department is also taking steps to more directly evaluate its forecasting accuracy.

Vaden says USDA is planning to launch an annual report, potentially beginning this fall, that will compare its crop forecasts against final production totals after the marketing year concludes. The effort is designed to give stakeholders a clearer picture of how USDA estimates stack up over time.

“This is not something that will be solved in a day,” Vaden says. “But we have to be brave enough to take feedback and issue public reports on how we did and how our numbers ended up stacking up against the final facts, so that we can begin the process of ensuring that there is continuous improvement with regard to the quality of USDA data.”

Behind the scenes, that process is already underway. Vaden says he is receiving internal briefings on the feedback submitted through the Request for Information and is meeting directly with trade groups and farmer representatives.

“I, as a matter of fact, am receiving a briefing later today on what the comments that came in as part of our request for information show, and how we can have further areas of improvement,” he says. “And I am meeting with some of the commenters… to hear from them personally about how we could do our job better.”

Is USDA’s Reorganization Impacting Data Accuracy?

Even before the formal announcement, questions had already been circulating about whether internal restructuring could affect USDA reporting.

Vaden dismisses that idea.

“Well, first, with regard to your question about whether there’s a link to the data, the answer is no,” he says. “Our WASDE professionals are professionals in the Office of the Chief Economist. They are unbothered by the reorganization. It doesn’t affect their day-to-day work at all.”

In practical terms, he suggests the impact on those teams is minimal.

“The only thing they’re going to have to do is leave the South Building and come over here to the Witten Building for lockup,” he says.

Still, the scale of the changes is significant. USDA is looking to shrink its Washington footprint, where the South Building is more than 70% vacant and carries over $1.6 billion in deferred maintenance, while relocating employees closer to rural communities.

“No private sector company in the world would pay for real estate that is more than 70% vacant,” Vaden says.

Q&A Underscores Concerns Over Trust, Participation, and Transparency

The question-and-answer session at the close of the Data Users meeting made clear that concerns about USDA data go beyond methodology.

Several attendees pressed officials on how the agency plans to reverse declining farmer response rates, with some noting that lower participation could introduce bias into key reports. NASS officials acknowledged the concern and pointed to expanded survey efforts as a primary solution, while also emphasizing outreach to better explain why farmer participation matters.

Officials say they are exploring additional ways to engage producers directly, including clearer communication about how survey data is used and stronger assurances around confidentiality.

Questions also focused on large revisions to recent crop estimates, with market participants asking whether those changes signal deeper issues in data collection or modeling. USDA representatives stressed that revisions are a normal part of the statistical process but acknowledged the need to better communicate why those adjustments occur and what they mean for users.

Another recurring theme was transparency, specifically, how USDA conveys uncertainty in its reports. Attendees urged the department to provide clearer indicators of confidence levels and potential variability, particularly during periods of market volatility. NASS officials pointed to planned “plain language” additions as one step toward making reports more accessible and easier to interpret.

Some participants also raised concerns about whether internal changes, including the department’s broader reorganization, could disrupt data quality or continuity. USDA officials reiterated that statistical staff and processes remain intact and said efforts are being made to ensure consistency regardless of organizational shifts.

Finally, several questions centered on accountability, and how USDA evaluates its own performance over time. Officials confirmed that the department is working toward publishing a regular assessment comparing forecasts to final outcomes, a move widely viewed by attendees as a meaningful step toward rebuilding confidence.

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden Says High-Level Washington Meeting Puts Fertilizer Industry on the Spot

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 20:09:59 GMT

The fertilizer market has been a growing point of tension in agriculture for years, but USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden says recent meetings in Washington marked a more direct and wide-ranging confrontation between federal officials and the companies that dominate input supply. Those discussions, he says, were not limited to USDA alone but included a broader slice of the administration’s economic leadership, signaling how central fertilizer costs have become to the national conversation on food production and inflation.

Vaden says cabinet-level officials from the Department of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative were present, alongside USDA leadership and state agriculture commissioners from Iowa and Georgia. Fertilizer executives were also in the room, making the meeting a rare setting where policy makers, regulators and industry leaders sat together to address pricing, supply constraints and long-term market structure.

He says the purpose was not simply informational, but confrontational in the sense of putting real-world farm impacts directly in front of industry decision-makers.

“It was an opportunity for those other cabinet officials to hear from the fertilizer company executives,” Vaden says, “and for those fertilizer company executives to hear from the secretary and me, as well as our two state counterparts who joined, about the real harm that farmers are facing from uncertainty in the market and, equally as importantly, years of elevated prices.”

Vaden says what often gets lost outside agriculture is that the current fertilizer environment is not a short-term disruption, but the continuation of a multi-year pricing trend that has reshaped farm budgets.

“For people who don’t pay attention to ag every day like your listeners do, they may think this fertilizer thing came out of nowhere,” Vaden says. “But American farmers know that we’re on year five or more of elevated prices for fertilizer, and questions about adequate supply of all fertilizer types.”

He adds that the timing of the discussions is critical, as global geopolitical tensions are only adding pressure to already strained markets.

“So I see this as an opportunity now that the attention of everyone is focused on fertilizer, not just agriculture, to begin to solve the problem that has taken years to develop and that has been exacerbated by the current situation in the Middle East,” Vaden says. “So that we don’t find ourselves in another long-term question about fertilizer supply going forward.”

USDA Pushes Industry: Bring Projects Forward or Explain the Bottlenecks

As discussions continue with fertilizer companies, Vaden says USDA is shifting the conversation from general concern to specific accountability. Rather than broad discussions about market conditions, he says officials are now asking companies to identify concrete projects that could increase supply and to explain why those investments have not yet materialized.

This approach, he says, reflects a broader strategy inside the department to move beyond analysis and toward action, particularly in areas where supply constraints have persisted for years without meaningful change.

In meetings held both jointly and separately with industry leaders, Vaden says USDA has been consistent in its message to fertilizer companies.

“We are saying the same thing to everyone who comes before the department,” Vaden says. “Be a part of the solution, don’t be a part of the problem.”

He says that includes detailed questions about whether expansion projects are already in development but stalled due to permitting delays, regulatory barriers or capital constraints. In some cases, he says, USDA is asking companies to identify where federal or state action could realistically speed up timelines.

“We are asking them what projects they have in the pipeline that they can bring on board to create new fertilizer supplies, hopefully here domestically, but if necessary, near-shoring overseas,” Vaden says. “And are there steps that we can take to make those projects move faster? Are there permits that are held up? Are there states or localities that are holding up their expansions? Are there investments that they are looking for with regard to needing capital to be able to expand their production capacity?”

He adds the department is not approaching the issue passively, but actively pressing for answers.

“We’re asking as many questions as we are making declarative statements, and we’re trying to see what levers we can pull to get more supply on the market,” Vaden says.

Market Concentration at Center of USDA Concerns

Beyond supply timelines and permitting issues, Vaden says one of the core structural concerns in fertilizer markets is the level of consolidation, particularly in phosphate production where a small number of companies control a dominant share of supply.

He says that level of concentration raises fundamental questions about how prices are formed and whether farmers are receiving signals that reflect true market conditions.

With that in mind, Vaden says USDA is focusing heavily on competition and price discovery as part of its broader review of input markets.

“With one of our fertilizer markets, there are two companies that control 90% market share,” Vaden says. “Anybody, I don’t care whether it’s fertilizer or what any other commodity you want to talk about, if there are only two major players, how can anyone be sure that the price you are paying reflects actual market conditions?”

He says the issue is not simply about individual price spikes, but about whether enough competition exists to keep pricing behavior transparent and responsive.

“In order to have adequate price discovery in a market, you need multiple players,” Vaden says.

That concern, he adds, is one of the reasons fertilizer investigations already underway by federal agencies predate recent geopolitical disruptions and continue to expand.

Vaden Details Heated Meeting With Mosaic: “A Different Tune in My Conference Room”

Among the most pointed parts of Vaden’s interview are his comments about a recent face-to-face meeting with Mosaic, one of the most influential players in the phosphate fertilizer market. He says the discussion, held in his conference room just this week, was direct and, at times, uncomfortable, focusing heavily on production decisions, capacity investment and the company’s role in a highly concentrated global market.

Vaden says he challenged Mosaic on why additional production capacity has not been brought online in the United States over a long period of time, and what barriers the company believes are preventing expansion.

He says he left the meeting with clear expectations for follow-up information from the company, describing it as an assignment rather than a casual discussion.

“I gave them a homework assignment,” Vaden says. “I told them what I expected to see, and I hope that they will get back to me as soon as possible.”

But what stood out most to him, he says, was not just what was said in the room, but how it contrasted with the company’s public messaging.

So disappointed in this response, @MosaicCompany, especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market. 🚨

Our Great President and this Administration have our farmers' backs. 💪🌾

Any sleight of hand will not be… https://t.co/GTCxcBQNgi
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 13, 2026

In his view, there was a noticeable difference between internal discussions and external communications, particularly on social media, where fertilizer policy debates have increasingly played out in public.

“And I will say, without being able to go into details, when they were in my office, they were singing a slightly different tune than they were signing on Twitter responding to the president’s Truth Social message that you noted,” Vaden says.

He uses that contrast to underscore what he sees as a broader disconnect between industry messaging and the realities USDA believes farmers are facing.

“We need more supply, we need answers, your company hasn’t provided either of those two things,” Vaden says. “It’s about time that you did.”

Industry Responses, Trade Policy Pressure and the Mosaic Question

While Vaden applies pressure to Mosaic, he notes that not all fertilizer companies are taking the same stance on trade policy and tariffs. He points specifically to Nutrien, which he says has indicated support for removing certain trade enforcement measures.

“I was very happy after I met with the Nutrien CEO that they came out and announced we don’t need this CVD order anymore,” Vaden says.

By contrast, he says Mosaic’s position on countervailing duties and phosphate trade enforcement remains unresolved, and that broader policy decisions are now effectively waiting on the company’s response.

He characterizes the situation as fluid but heavily dependent on industry input.

“Right now the question is in Mosaic’s court, if you will,” Vaden says. “And we’re waiting for an answer from them.”

He adds that regulatory or executive action is unlikely to be taken in a vacuum while negotiations and responses are still unfolding.

“One thing that I know as a lawyer is that there’s a whole lot more possible if you have consent of the parties than if you don’t,” Vaden says. “With consent, nearly all things are possible.”

Investigations Expand as USDA Seeks Farmer-Reported Data

Alongside industry meetings, Vaden says USDA is working with the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission on ongoing fertilizer market investigations, with a particular focus on pricing behavior and market transparency.

He says one challenge is the nature of pricing information itself, which often reaches farmers through informal channels and can change quickly.

“We’re asking questions and waiting for answers, and we need farmers’ help as part of our question asking,” Vaden says.

He describes a pattern many farmers have reported directly to USDA, where fertilizer prices are quoted in a way that encourages immediate purchase rather than delayed buying.

“I know in my own family’s operation that you get phone calls, and those phone calls tell you ‘Here’s what the price is now, and if you wait, here’s what the price will be later,’” Vaden says. “And that later price is never lower than the price that it is now.”

To address that, he says USDA is working on a confidential reporting system designed to protect farmer identity while improving data quality for investigators.

“If they trust us with their information, if they trust us with the facts that they have, they’ll be able to remain anonymous,” Vaden says. “And the companies under investigation will not know who shared what data with us.”

“This Has Been Going On for Too Long”

Vaden closes by emphasizing that fertilizer prices and supply constraints are not a new challenge for agriculture, but an entrenched issue that has persisted through multiple years and market cycles.

He says the administration is trying to shift both short-term supply conditions and long-term structural dynamics at the same time, adding that USDA’s goal is not temporary relief, but sustained changes in supply, competition and pricing stability.

“We are focused on getting new supplies here now, and not just now, but next year and the year after that and the years after that,” Vaden says. “So that we can have guaranteed new supplies over the long term.”

Vaden’s Message to Farmers: “We’re Saying the Same Thing in Public and in Private”

At the end of the conversation, Vaden returned to what he described as the central audience for everything USDA is doing on fertilizer: farmers themselves. He acknowledged frustration is not just growing, but it has become a defining sentiment across much of farm country as input costs remain elevated and supply questions persist year after year.

He emphasized USDA’s posture is not different depending on the room or the audience, whether speaking with industry executives, other federal agencies, or producers themselves.

“I want farmers to know that when I am sitting with representatives of other cabinet departments or when I am sitting with big fertilizer CEOs, I am saying the same thing in private that you hear me saying in public,” Vaden says. “I do not change my tune. I may be slightly more polite, but I am equally as direct in terms of telling them what I think the situation is.”

Vaden says that directness is rooted in what he believes farmers are already experiencing on the ground, particularly when it comes to fertilizer pricing volatility and uncertainty in purchasing decisions. He says producers are not misreading the situation — they are responding to real, long-running pressures.

He also acknowledges the emotional toll on producers is part of the reality USDA is hearing more frequently.

“I especially communicate to them that farmers have gone from exasperation to anger with the situation that we have now,” Vaden says. “They are not wrong to be feeling those emotions because they understand that this is not a new situation.”

Looking ahead, Vaden says USDA’s goal is not just to address short-term pricing spikes, but to change the underlying conditions that have kept fertilizer costs elevated for years. That includes expanding supply, increasing competition and improving long-term stability in input markets.

“This is an issue that has bedeviled American agriculture for at least five years, and it is time that it stopped,” Vaden says.

Screwworm Fight: $750M Sterile Fly Facility Groundbreaking in Texas

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 20:30:16 GMT

USDA officially broke ground on a $750 million sterile fly production facility Friday in Edinburg, Texas, marking a major escalation in the fight against the New World screwworm (NWS). Located at Moore Air Base, this facility will provide the U.S. with a domestic supply of sterile flies — up to 300 million per week — to protect livestock, wildlife and the national food supply chain from the invasive parasite.

During the groundbreaking ceremony, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said she did not have an announcement about the reopening of the U.S.-Mexico border. On Wednesday, a report from a state official in Mexico incorrectly claimed that USDA has set a date to resume livestock imports from Mexico. According to Rollins and an USDA APHIS social media post , the claim is not accurate.

“Every day we are analyzing,” she says. “We’ve never been in a better position than we are in today, to a path. Now, I want to be very clear: New World screwworm is only about 200 miles from this border, so there will not be a port opening in Texas until it is significantly pushed back. But New World screwworm is roughly around 800 miles from the Douglas, Ariz., port and the two ports in New Mexico. So, we are looking every day to make sure we are protecting our livestock and national security.”

Rollins did announce she will be at the Douglas port next Friday, April 24, taking a firsthand look at that border crossing.

How Close Is NWS to the U.S.?

As of April 16, Mexico reports 1,300 active NWS cases in animals, with 746 cases in bovine. The latest case status map shows two active cases in the Nuevo León area, approximately 90 miles from the Texas border. The most recent case was a 7-day-old calf. On April 10, there was a canine located in the municipality of Monterrey also in Nuevo León. Along the coast south of Brownsville, in the state of Tamaulipas, there are multiple cases reported in the last week in young bovine.

USDA continues to distribute sterile flies in those NWS hot zones.

How Does Sterile Fly Production Stop Screwworm?

A sterile fly production facility plays a crucial role in NWS prevention and response. In a biosecure environment, NWS flies are raised and sterilized using irradiation before being released in targeted areas. Because female screwworm flies mate only once, mating with sterile males results in eggs that do not hatch. Sterile insect technique, paired with surveillance, animal movement restrictions, and education and outreach, has been the foundation of successful NWS eradication efforts for decades.

“Breaking ground on this facility marks a major investment in safeguarding America’s livestock and the producers who feed this nation. This puts NWS sterile fly production in American hands, so we do not have to rely on other countries for the best offensive measure to push screwworm away from our borders,” Rollins says. “The New World screwworm threatens the health of our herds, the stability of rural economies, and the resilience of our supply chain. President Trump and his entire cabinet is committed to leveraging every resource necessary to contain this pest, protect American agriculture, and ensure the long-term security of our food supply chain.”

Today at the Southern Border, we officially broke ground on @USDA’s new sterile New World Screwworm production facility.🇺🇸

For months, we’ve been on offense:
• Monitoring 8,000+ traps along the southern border
• Testing nearly 51,000 fly specimens — all negative
•… pic.twitter.com/VUE1KrX4TA
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 17, 2026

Rollins was at Moore Air Base Feb. 9 for a grand opening of a sterile fly dispersal facility at the same location. This facility expanded USDA’s ability to disperse sterile flies along the border and into the U.S., if necessary.

What is the Timeline for the Edinburg Facility?

“Once operational, this facility will initially produce an additional 100 million sterile flies per week in phase one, but eventually, when we get to Stage 2, which will be the end of 2028, we’ll be at 300 million sterile flies. When you combine that with all of the other flies that are being produced, that moves us from containment to eradication,” Rollins emphasizes.

Also at the groundbreaking was Lt. Gen. William H. “Butch” Graham, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) commanding general.

“Our mission at USACE is to deliver engineering solutions, with our partners, to secure our nation, strengthen our economy, and reduce disaster risk,” Graham says. “That’s why we’re proud to deliver an engineering solution to the New World Screwworm, which represents a direct threat to our nation’s livestock, our food security and our economy. This new, modern facility is the critical infrastructure we need to secure a defensive line against the New World screwworm for generations to come.”

The new facility is being built with an aggressive timeline designed to quickly expand the nation’s sterile fly production capacity:

Initial operational capability targeted for November 2027, reaching production of 100 million sterile flies per week.
Construction continues immediately beyond initial operations to scale full production capacity to 300 million sterile flies per week.
USDA and USACE have slashed red tape, securing expedited procurement, and eliminating other barriers.
Together, USDA and USACE will oversee installation and commissioning of specialized systems that will make this facility operable on time, delivering the critical sterile flies we need to continue to defeat this pest.

Why is Domestic Fly Production Important for U.S. Agriculture?

This new state-of-the-art facility will complement USDA’s ongoing production of 100 million sterile flies per week at the Panama-based COPEG facility . USDA has also invested $21 million to support modernization of a facility in Metapa, Mexico, expected to be operational in summer 2026.

According to a USDA press release : “Once fully operational, this expanded production network will provide the speed, scale, and domestic capability needed to rapidly counter any NWS threat — reducing risks to producers, protecting animal health, and strengthening the resilience of America’s livestock industry.”

Read more about why the border is closed and its impact:
The 1.1 Million Head Gap: Analyzing the Impact of the U.S.-Mexico Border Closure
Should Beef Producers Be Concerned About Potential Phased Reopening of U.S.-Mexico Border?
From Lawsuits to Screwworms: Policy Uncertainty Rolls Downhill to Producers

Cattle Industry Policy Risks 2026: Screwworm Response & Trade Uncertainty

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 19:58:03 GMT

Whether it’s a 20-year lawsuit over poultry litter in Oklahoma, the looming threat of New World screwworm (NWS) or renewed debate over origin labeling, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association’s Ethan Lane sees the same pattern: The burden eventually falls on cattle producers.

Lane, NCBA senior vice president of government affairs, was a guest Wednesday on “ AgriTalk ,” pointing out how regulatory shifts and legal settlements can quickly erode the certainty ranchers rely on, especially when border policies and labeling rules are decided without a clear plan for how they’ll play out in the countryside.

Here are the key takeaways from Lane’s discussion with Chip Flory.

1. Oklahoma Poultry Litter Lawsuit Has Wider Implications for Cattle Producers

Both NCBA and the Oklahoma Cattlemen’s Association made statements following the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma’s rejection of the state of Oklahoma’s negotiated settlement with four poultry companies in the decades-old State of Oklahoma v. Tyson Foods, Inc., et al., lawsuit regarding the application of chicken litter in the Illinois River Watershed .

Lane says though the case has to do with chicken litter, it has direct implications for cattle producers because it involves Nutrient Management Plans (NMPs), a core tool many livestock operations rely on for regulatory certainty.

He explains that if a state can settle in a way that undermines NMPs, it sends a message that even when producers “check all the boxes,” they can still “have the rug pulled out from underneath” them in federal court. If NMPs are invalidated in court, producers lose their safe-harbor status.

His warning is that settlements that go beyond established expectations should concern every cattle producer, because compliance burdens and liability ultimately roll downhill to producers.

2. NWS Response Playbook Is Critical Preparation

Lane says the New World Screwworm (NWS) Response Playbook is the product of months of collaboration between USDA, impacted states and state animal health officials.

“We know screwworm is coming, right? We know that despite the best efforts of the federal government, we are most likely going to have to deal with screwworm on U.S. soil,” he summarizes.

He explains the playbook is meant to:

Define how cattle will move, go to slaughter or move to the next production phase if NWS is present.
Integrate state and federal responses so the industry does not repeat the confusion seen early in the high-path disease issues in dairy cattle.
Provide clarity and predictability for producers and the supply chain when NWS cases occur.

Read more about the playbook and how surveillance, targeted treatment and movement controls will help protect cattle operations while preserving business stability when NWS invades:

Ready for the Risk: USDA Releases Updated New World Screwworm Response Playbook

How Will U.S. Producers Maintain Business when New World Screwworm Invades?

3. Border Reopening With Mexico Must Be Deliberate and Predictable

Lane emphasizes that deciding when to reopen the border for cattle commerce will be “more art than science.”

“The secretary has a really important job in determining whether or not our Mexican friends are meeting all the obligations that they have here and that they are being collaborative partners,” he says. “We continue to believe that what’s most important here is making sure that the reopening of the border is planned, it’s announced, it’s very predictable.”

NCBA’s priority is a planned, announced and predictable border reopening so supply chains can plan around it and speculation is minimized.

“We’ve seen what happens with speculation in the markets surrounding this, and it’s not good for producers,” he says.

Wednesday a report from a state official in Mexico incorrectly claimed that USDA has set a date to resume livestock imports from Mexico. According to a USDA APHIS social media post this is not accurate.

“USDA has not set a date for resuming livestock imports. USDA will resume livestock imports only when we determine that the risk of New World Screwworm introduction into the United States can be adequately mitigated.”

Read more about the impact of the U.S.-Mexico Border Closure:

The 1.1 Million Head Gap: Analyzing the Impact of the U.S.-Mexico Border Closure

Should Beef Producers Be Concerned About Potential Phased Reopening of U.S.-Mexico Border?

4. Skepticism Toward Mandatory Country-of-Origin Labeling (MCOOL)

Lane acknowledges MCOOL’s political popularity with some stakeholders. He notes NCBA once supported it and later reversed policy because producers didn’t get the promised premiums and instead faced significant compliance costs.

“MCOOL doesn’t generate premiums for producers,” he says. “Giving the packer an extra 10 cents a pound on those cattle doesn’t help my members across the country make more money.”

He argues that consumers say they’ll pay more for “born, raised, harvested in the USA,” but in practice they buy on price and quality.

“We’ve been very supportive of closing the Product of the USA labeling loophole and putting some promotion behind it to educate folks about what’s possible,” Lane says. “That’s where we think we’ll find real premiums. MCOOL is a road to just higher consumer prices, and that’s the last thing the White House wants right now.”

He adds local and regional labels, like born, raised and harvested in Nebraska, are more effective at creating real producer premiums than a broad, mandatory origin label.

As the beef industry continues to navigate a volatile 2026, the intersection of legal precedents, biosecurity threats and trade policy continues to redefine the rancher’s risk profile. For Lane, the goal remains clear: ensuring that federal regulations and court rulings provide a predictable roadmap rather than an unexpected burden.

In a landscape where the “rug can be pulled” at any moment, maintaining a seat at the policy table is the only way to ensure that the burden of uncertainty doesn’t stop at the farm gate.

Trump Warns Fertilizer Giants Against "Price Gouging" as Costs Soar 40%

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:46:54 GMT

Fertilizer market volatility is once again taking center stage as geopolitical tensions disrupt global supply lines and push input costs sharply higher. New analysis shows the increase in fertilizer prices may not be over, even if the Strait of Hormuz reopens soon.

Even with the situation in Iran pushing prices even higher, the sharp increase in fertilizer prices from 2020 to now is catching attention in Washington. Not only did President Donald Trump take to social media to warn of ‘price gouging,’ but Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins also posted on X Monday, specifically expressing frustration over Mosaic’s response to farmers.

While Rollins and USDA Under Secretary Stephen Vaden have raised concerns over fertilizer prices this year, the president posted on Truth Social over the weekend that he is closely monitoring fertilizer prices and pledged support for American farmers.

Trump said Saturday on his Truth Social platform he is “watching fertilizer prices CLOSELY” during what he described as the US “FIGHT FOR FREEDOM in Iran”, adding that the administration “will not accept PRICE GOUGING from the fertilizer monopoly”.

On Monday, Rollins posted on X, saying she was “So disappointed in this response” from Mosaic, “especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market.”

So disappointed in this response, @MosaicCompany, especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market. 🚨

Our Great President and this Administration have our farmers' backs. 💪🌾

Any sleight of hand will not be… https://t.co/GTCxcBQNgi
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 13, 2026

Mosaic announced last week the decision to shut down major phosphate operations in Brazil, a move the that will cut production, reduce jobs, and signal a *strategic shift in how the fertilizer giant deploys its capital.

Mosaic Company announced Thursday it will idle two phosphate facilities in Brazil as part of a broader effort to cut costs and shift capital. Mosaic expects idling of the facilities to reduce annual phosphate production by approximately 1 million tonnes. CEO Bruce Bodine says the decision reflects what he calls a disciplined focus on long-term returns.

.@MosaicCompany, you’re right that U.S. farmers are facing a difficult economic situation, only made worse by the extra $6.9 BILLION they have had to spend on fertilizer since you petitioned the government to place duties on imported phosphorus. This has played a major role in… https://t.co/UuOqjE0jBu
— National Corn (NCGA) (@NationalCorn) April 13, 2026

Mosaic and Simplot have also been in the cross hairs of the push to remove countervailing duties on Moroccan phosphate . Groups like the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) claim the CVDs are costing U.S. agriculture $1 billion each year.

The CVDs on Moroccan phosphate were put into place by the International Trade Commission (ITC) in 2021. As the sunset review begins, more than 50 state grower groups including the Texas Corn Producers Association, sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce and the ITC to revoke the countervailing duties on imported phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia.

In separate filings by Mosaic and Simplot to the ITC and the Department of Commerce, both companies said the continuation is necessary to maintain a “level playing field.”

In a written response to Farm Journal, Mosaic said:

“American farmers depend on a strong domestic fertilizer industry, which in turn depends on strong enforcement of U.S. trade laws that ensure a level playing field. Mosaic is proud to support U.S. agriculture with high-quality, reliable products produced here at home.”

Iran War’s Current Impact on Fertilizer Prices

The message from the Trump adminstration comes as tensions escalate in the Strait of Hormuz, where the United States is weighing a potential full naval blockade. Ship traffic through the critical waterway has already dropped from roughly 135 vessels per day to the single digits. A complete shutdown could halt flows entirely, further increasing fertilizer prices.

The stakes are high as roughly one-third of global fertilizer shipments move through the strait, and the disruption is already sending prices higher, up more than 40% compared to a year ago.

It is the 6-week anniversary of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Fert price comparisons:

NOLA urea - +$230 or 49%
NOLA UAN - +$145 or 38%
Midwest NH3 - +$245 or 32%
NOLA DAP - +$130 or 21%
NOLA potash - +$10 or 3%

...corn - 2-cents or 0.5% higher#sickeningforfarmers
— Josh Linville (@JLinvilleFert) April 10, 2026

Market data shows the impact Iran is having on already high fertilizer prices. According to StoneX analyst Josh Linville says in the six weeks since the war started:

Urea prices have surged by $230 per ton, a 49% increase
UAN is up $145 per ton, or 38%
Anhydrous ammonia has climbed $245 per ton, a 32% jump.
In contrast, corn prices have barely responded, rising just two cents, or about half a percent. The divergence is putting additional pressure on farm margins.

DOJ Probe Into Fertilizer Costs Seeks Input From Farmers

The Trump administration is asking farmers to help provide information as part of an ongoing U.S. Department of Justice investigation into elevated costs for fertilizer, machinery and other key agricultural inputs, according to reporting from Bloomberg.

Bloomberg reported the effort is aimed at gathering more on-the-ground data as regulators examine whether fertilizer producers may have coordinated to raise prices. The DOJ investigation was first reported in early March, when Bloomberg said federal officials had begun looking into whether fertilizer companies engaged in price coordination.

According to the Bloomberg report, Vaden said he has already met with officials at both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to discuss potential lines of inquiry. He also noted that farmers could play a key role in the process.

Vaden said farmers “have a lot of information that might be relevant to these investigations.”

Bloomberg previously reported in early March that the Department of Justice is investigating whether fertilizer producers colluded to increase prices.

Speaking at the North American Agricultural Journalists’ annual conference in Washington on Monday, Vaden encouraged farmer participation in the probe, emphasizing confidentiality protections.

“We need farmers to help provide us with that information on a confidential basis, so that that can help inform the investigations that are ongoing,” Vaden said, according to Bloomberg. “I think we will have a mechanism in order to help encourage that exchange of information.”

NCGA Surveys Show Not All Farmers Have Fertilizer Secured for 2026

Against that backdrop, along with fertilizer prices climbing even higher in the six weeks after the conflict started with Iran, new surveys results from NCGA highlight how those market pressures are translating to on-farm realities.

Krista Swanson, chief economist for NCGA, says the organization conducted the survey to better understand fertilizer availability from the farmer perspective. Ag Secretary Rollins has told mainstream media that 80% of farmers have fertilizer locked in for 2026, but NCGA data contradicts that figure.

“We’re hearing that number being thrown around too, which is why we really wanted to find out directly from farmers what the status is for them,” Swanson says.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

A Significant Gap in Fertilizer Readiness

The surveys show that only 60% of farmers report having their nitrogen fully purchased or secured for the 2026 growing season, while 64% say the same for phosphate. That leaves a sizable portion of producers still working to lock in supplies.

“When you think about over 500,000 corn farmers in the U.S., this isn’t a small number,” Swanson says. “Our survey results indicate that over 200,000 farmers still need at least some fertilizer for this year.”

Nitrogen remains a critical input for corn production and is closely tied to yield potential. Any shortfall, whether driven by availability or cost, can directly affect productivity and profitability.

NCGA Grower Surveys

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

Younger Farmers Feeling the Pressure Most

The survey also points to uneven impacts across the farm sector, with younger farmers facing greater challenges in securing fertilizer.

Swanson says younger producers reported having more nitrogen left to purchase compared to older farmers.

“You think about younger farmers that have less capital already built up in their business, maybe tighter cash flow needs because of their equity position,” she says. “This does seem to have a disproportional impact on younger farmers.”

That dynamic raises concerns about financial strain among newer operations in a high-cost environment.

Corn Acres Likely Stable, But With Reduced Inputs

Despite the challenges, most farmers are not planning to reduce corn acreage. The survey found that 80% of respondents expect to maintain their planned acres.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

At the same time, fertilizer application rates may fall short. Half of the farmers surveyed say they do not expect to apply their full amount of fertilizer.

“Pairing these two together, it seems to me like we are still going to see a lot of corn acres get planted,” Swanson says. “But those corn acres will have less fertilizer than maybe what they would have otherwise had.”

That combination could limit yield potential if input reductions become widespread.

Growing Concern Shifts to 2027

While fertilizer availability remains a concern for 2026, attention is already turning to the next crop year. Fertilizer purchasing follows a rolling cycle, and planning for 2027 will begin soon.

Survey responses show that for every one farmer more concerned about fertilizer price and availability for 2026, nearly two are more concerned about 2027.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

“So farmers are concerned as we look ahead to next year,” Swanson says.

The shift reflects uncertainty about how long supply disruptions and elevated prices will persist.

Supply Chain Recovery May Take Time

Even if geopolitical tensions ease, relief may not come quickly. Swanson notes that the fertilizer market is still dealing with production disruptions and supply chain backlogs.

“A short-term ceasefire has limited immediate impact on this ongoing fertilizer crisis for farmers,” she says. “Even when a permanent end to the situation is reached, we’re still looking at recovery from supply chain backlogs and halted production that could take a long time to recover from.”

Damage to key inputs such as liquid natural gas and sulfur production could take years to repair, keeping pressure on supply.

A Tightening Outlook

The NCGA survey underscores a challenging environment for corn producers. Most acres are expected to be planted this year, but not all will receive optimal fertilizer applications. At the same time, concern is building for 2027 as farmers look ahead to the next purchasing cycle.

For many producers, the issue is no longer just securing fertilizer for this season. It is navigating a period of sustained uncertainty that could shape production decisions, costs, and risk management strategies across the U.S. corn sector.

Longstanding Concerns Over Market Concentration

In September 2025, USDA and the U.S. Department of Justice signed a Memorandum of Understanding, committing both agencies to jointly examine high and volatile input costs, which included fertilizer, by scrutinizing competitive conditions in agricultural markets and enforcing antitrust laws, particularly around price setting and market concentration.

While geopolitical tensions are the latest driver of volatility, many farm groups argue the root of the problem runs deeper. Matt Perdue, president of the North Dakota Farmers Union, says ongoing federal investigations into fertilizer pricing must lead to meaningful action.

“We appreciate the administration’s investigations into input costs,” Perdue says. “But investigations don’t do anything if they’re not followed by enforcement, and they don’t do anything if we don’t learn what came out of those investigations.”

Groups like the Texas Corn Producers Association have been raising concerns about fertilizer market concentration for years. Texas farmer Dee Vaughan says the organization began studying the issue in 2020, working with the Agricultural and Food Policy Center at Texas A&M to examine pricing trends.

“We’ve been very concerned about all of our input costs, but specifically fertilizer, because it’s the one that just keeps going up almost exponentially,” Vaughan says.

He adds those studies found a shift in how fertilizer prices are determined . Historically tied closely to natural gas costs, the study found nitrogen fertilizer pricing began tracking corn prices more closely after 2010, a change Vaughan says reflects deeper structural issues.

According to Vaughan, the small number of firms controlling the market have the data and market awareness to price inputs based on farmers’ revenue potential, rather than production costs.

“They all have economists on staff,” Vaughan says. “They know exactly what our costs are, what our income is, and they’re able to extract value based on what they see as the gross income of a farmer. It’s not based on cost of production any longer.”

USDA’s "Male-Only" Fly Breakthrough to Transform Screwworm Eradication

Fri, 10 Apr 2026 14:18:30 GMT

USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is advancing the next evolution of the long-trusted sterile insect technique (SIT) to protect U.S. livestock from New World screwworm (NWS) by introducing a 100% male-only sterile fly strain. This breakthrough will effectively double the production capacity of sterile fly facilities without expanding physical infrastructure. By eliminating the production of “useless” female flies, the USDA-ARS innovation aims to push the NWS fly further south, providing a more robust and cost-effective defense for American livestock producers.

A USDA spokesperson explains, “USDA is using gold standard, proven scientific methods to manufacture NWS flies to produce only male flies and increase the efficiency of SIT. USDA is simply making a proven tool even more efficient and effective to better protect America’s farmers and ranchers.”

USDA currently produces sterile flies for dispersal at the COPEG facility in Panama. USDA is also investing $21 million to support Mexico’s renovation of an existing fruit fly facility in Metapa — which will double NWS production capacity once complete.

Moore Air Base: On Time and On Budget for 2026 Production

Dudley Hoskins, USDA under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs, was a guest Tuesday on AgriTalk. He discussed sterile fly dispersal efforts.

“We’re doing two things,” he says. “One, the Secretary has us modernizing our infrastructure and our production capacity. She has us working on Moore Air Base, which will be a sterile fly production facility, that when it’s finally complete and at max-capacity production, will be producing about 300 million sterile flies per week. ”

Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden recently reported USDA is on track and on time with regard to the Moore Air Base facility near Edinburg, Texas.

The Science of Stopping the Spread: Why Male-Only Matters

SIT, when paired with surveillance, movement restrictions and education and outreach, is an effective tool for controlling and eradicating NWS. Female NWS flies only mate once in their lives, so if they mate with a sterile male, they lay unfertilized eggs that don’t hatch. Releasing sterile flies just outside of affected areas helps ensure flies traveling to new areas will only encounter sterile mates and will not be able to reproduce.

Hoskins says concurrent to the process at Moore Air Base, USDA is working with its partners at the ARS and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate the genetically-engineered fly — the NovoFly — which would help get more male flies in the sterile fly production facility.

Vaden calls the possibility exciting.

“Basically we’ve been losing half of the production at every facility because what we need are sterile male flies, but of course with nature, half of what you get are female flies, and those to this particular enterprise are useless,” he explains. “Thanks to our agricultural research service, we now have the ability to pump out 100% sterile male flies only, no wastage. That has the effect of doubling production without any change in the available facilities.“

He adds, “We expect to be able, once EPA approves that innovation is safe later this year, to have all those facilities, including the one under construction at Moore Air Base, pumping out 100% sterile male flies, which will make our ability to push this pest back further south where it belongs to take root and begin to have great effect. Not just to hold it, but to push it further south.”

Hoskins summarizes, “All of those things are in motion, all things happening concurrently, and all those will be critical in modernizing our toolbox to take the fight to the screwworm.”

Listen to the conversation on AgriTalk :

Regulatory Road Map: The EPA Public Comment Period

USDA is following established regulatory pathways and submitted to EPA an Emergency Use Exemption and Application for Registration. EPA published the notice of receipt and request for comments in the Federal Register on March 27 and is accepting public comments until April 27 before making a determination.

According to the notice, the application from USDA states: “To register a new pesticide product containing an unregistered pesticide, NovoFly male-only genetically engineered (GE) New World screwworm (NWS) in USDA’s Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) programs. Additionally, the Agency received a Section 18 quarantine emergency exemption application requesting use of the same pesticide to maintain broad suppression of and help prevent the pest from moving further northward from Mexico toward the United States.”

EPA is providing the notice in accordance with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

The notice says, “Due to the urgent nature of the emergency, the limited time available to authorize the Section 18 quarantine emergency exemption request and the related FIFRA Section 3 product registration application under review for the same use, EPA is waiving the comment period associated with the emergency exemption request but is soliciting public comment in conjunction with the application for Section 3 product registration of NovoFly.”

To make comments or learn more, visit the EPA website .

Read more about sterile flies and current distribution:

USDA Updates New World Screwworm Response Playbook for Ranchers and Vets

Thu, 09 Apr 2026 12:35:24 GMT

The “ New World Screwworm Response Playbook” was developed as a resource to help animal health officials and responders manage and adapt their response if NWS is found in the U.S. The first draft of the Playbook was released in October 2025.

U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) released an updated Playbook to serve as a comprehensive guide to support coordinated, science-based action should NWS be detected.

“USDA continues to execute Secretary Rollins’ five-pronged plan to keep NWS out of the United States,” says Dudley Hoskins, USDA under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs. “While we are aggressively safeguarding American agriculture and working with Mexico to prevent further northward spread, we must also ensure that our domestic response plans are ready for immediate activation. Strong coordination with states, producers, veterinarians, sportsmen and other partners is essential to achieving that goal.”

Hoskins was a guest Tuesday on AgriTalk. He discussed NWS preventative and response measures, including the sterile fly dispersal efforts.

He explains the goal of the Playbook is to try to balance that constant posture of vigilance, prevention and emergency response coordination.

“We want to be as least disruptive to the industry and commerce as possible,” he explains.

Hoskins stresses APHIS is asking for feedback on version two of the Playbook as they continue to fine-tune the response plan.

“We’re asking that same community of states and industry partners to continue to review the playbook,” he explains. “We want to continue to have those discussions and and those deliberations to improve the can and hopefully perfect have to use it, and hopefully never have to use it.”

Refining the Rules: Key Updates to the 2026 Playbook

The updated Playbook outlines critical science-based strategies for federal, state, tribal and local responders, including how to:

Coordinate response operations
Reduce spread and prevent establishment of NWS in new areas
Manage the pest in infested animals
Implement NWS fly surveillance and control measures
Maintain continuity of business
Support efficient information flow and situational awareness

APHIS has released the updated New World Screwworm Response Playbook - strengthening preparedness via coordination with states, producers, veterinarians, wildlife & other partners.🤝
It guides rapid, science-based action should NWS be detected in the U.S.https://t.co/lgplvaNjDy pic.twitter.com/kq4wKbqkGY
— USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (@USDA_APHIS) April 8, 2026

Collaborative Design: Incorporating Tribal and Industry Expertise

After sharing the draft Playbook in October 2025, APHIS worked to gather feedback from state animal health officials, federal partners, livestock and wildlife industry groups, tribal partners, veterinary organizations and other key stakeholders to prepare the updated version.

According to the APHIS press release , “Their expertise and operational experience were essential in shaping practical, field-ready guidance for real-world response scenarios.”

Based on this feedback, APHIS made several key updates to the Playbook including clarifying and expanding:

Terminology — NWS establishment, suspect, zones, types, phases, quarantines — treatment versus preventative NWS animal drugs and pesticide products
Agency roles, responsibilities and authorities
Animal movement requirements
Wildlife management, including:
- Improved description of roles, responsibilities and authorities related to wildlife
- Added and improved definitions of confined, farmed, and free-ranging wildlife
- Refined guidance on use of antiparasitic drugs and pesticide for use on/in wildlife
- Development guidance on wildlife surveillance

Accessing the Playbook: Resources for Producers and Responders

APHIS updated four supplemental guidance documents that were posted with the draft Playbook and added an additional eight supplemental guidance documents, all referenced in the Playbook .

(USDA APHIS NWS Playbook)

“To ensure continued alignment with state-level plans and industry practices, APHIS will continue to revise the Playbook as preparedness activities advance and evolve,” the release explains. “The agency will continue to work directly with states, territories, tribes, federal agencies, industry wildlife and other partners to refine response tools, strengthen coordination and support joint planning efforts.”

Your Next Reads:

The 1.1 Million Head Gap: Analyzing the Impact of the U.S.-Mexico Border Closure

Tue, 07 Apr 2026 03:01:13 GMT

For more than 35 years, Mexican cattle have been a critical component of the American beef supply chain.

The U.S.-Mexico border has been closed since July 9 . A temporary phased reopening that began July 7 with the Douglas, Ariz., port was short-lived with a case reported July 8, 370 miles from the border, which was 160 miles northward of the sterile fly dispersal grid at that time.

Derrell Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension livestock marketing specialist, says, “Prior to the border closing in November 2024, U.S. imports of Mexican cattle had averaged 1.18 million head annually in the previous decade (Figure 1) and 1.12 million head per year in the previous 35 years.”

(Oklahoma State University)

Mexican cattle imports equaled 3.4% of the total U.S. calf crop from 2015 to 2024 and 3.1% since 1990. The brief border opening in 2025 allowed about 230,000 head to cross, 0.7% of the 2025 calf crop.

(Oklahoma State University)

Figure 2 shows the average seasonal pattern of Mexican cattle imports from 2019 to 2023.

“The typical pattern is bimodal with peaks in March and again in November/December,” Peel says. “Calves carried over from the previous year are typically exported in the first half of the year with relatively few exported in the heat of the summer. New-crop calves start to be exported in the final months of the year, carrying over into the next year.”

(Oklahoma State University)

Figure 3 shows the distribution Mexican cattle imports by port in 2023, the last year with a fully open border. The largest port is Santa Teresa, N.M., which accounted for nearly 43% of cattle crossing.

Peel reports, along with the Columbus port, New Mexico accounted for more than 53% of total cattle imports. The ports at Nogales and Douglas in Arizona represented another 27.5% of cattle crossings. The six ports in Texas accounted for a total of 19.2% of total Mexican cattle imports. The largest Texas port is Presidio/Ojinaga with 7.7% of the total.

Potential Phased Reopening: How Much and How Fast Can Cattle Imports Recover?

Peel says rumors are currently swirling that the border could open soon , probably with the phased plan to open ports from west to east over time. He says, if the border would reopen, the recovery will not be very fast.

“It will take several weeks for border facilities to restaff and have USDA-APHIS personnel in place to inspect and clear paperwork for crossing cattle,” he stresses. “It takes time (and cost) for Mexican producers to prepare cattle and the paperwork needed for crossing. It’s not clear how aggressive Mexican producers will be initially until they have a sense of how stable the border situation might be.”

By the time cattle can begin crossing, it will be close to the heat of summer, which is likely to limit crossings. Peel predicts if cattle are allowed to cross relatively soon, numbers of cattle imports could begin to recover significantly by fall.

Exactly what that recovery looks like, and the numbers expected are uncertain.

“Mexico has continued to adapt since the border has been closed, utilizing previously exported cattle in domestic markets,” Peel explains. “Mexico has developed significant cattle feeding and packing infrastructure in the past 25 or so years. More infrastructure investment is underway.”

Read more about the potential border reopening:

Should Beef Producers Be Concerned About Potential Phased Reopening of U.S.-Mexico Border?

Mexico is the eighth largest beef-producing country and the seventh largest beef-consuming country. Mexico is the number 11 beef exporting country and beef exports have grown more than 10 times in the past 20 years.

“U.S. imports of Mexican cattle are part of an increasingly integrated cattle and beef trade relationship between Mexico and the U.S.,” Peel adds. “Mexican cattle imports have been important for many decades.”

(Oklahoma State University)

In the 1980s, Mexico became a significant beef export market for the U.S. and is currently the No. 3 beef export market. More recently, after 2010, Mexico has become a significant source of U.S. beef imports, currently the No. 4 source of beef imports, see Figure 4.

“Cattle and beef trade between the U.S. and Mexico are interrelated markets ,so the current disruption in cattle movement across the border may have a variety of impacts in the future,” Peel summarizes.

Your Next Read:

Tighter Supplies and Border Closures: A Snapshot of Today’s Cattle Feeding Industry

Should Beef Producers Be Concerned About Potential Phased Reopening of U.S.-Mexico Border?

Fri, 03 Apr 2026 18:43:31 GMT

The debate at the U.S.-Mexico border continues as the fear of New World screwworm (NWS) increases with warmer spring temperatures while the supplies of feeder cattle tighten.

The border has been closed since July 9 . A temporary phased reopening that began July 7 with the Douglas, Ariz., port was short-lived with a case reported July 8, 370 miles from the border, which was 160 miles northward of the sterile fly dispersal grid at that time.

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins spoke with media during the Texas Southwest Cattle Raisers Convention about a potential phased reopening of the border.

“We’re looking at it every single day,” she says. “The closest the screwworm has gotten to the Arizona border is about 800 miles. So, we’re currently evaluating a potential phased-in strategy. We obviously will not be opening all four ports anytime soon, but there is a realistic conversation that’s currently happening that’s looking at that port that’s about 800 miles from the closest case. More to come on that. I expect an announcement either way on that, perhaps within the next two to four weeks.”

A USDA spokesperson confirmed her statement, explaining, “USDA will resume livestock imports at such a time when we determine the risk of NWS introduction into the U.S. can be adequately mitigated. To make the determination, USDA is evaluating a combination of factors including our science-based import protocol, the animal health status of individual Mexican states, and the degree to which Mexico’s national agriculture authority has made progress in implementing our recommendations.”

Where is the Closest Case?

A USDA spokesperson told Drovers the active case closest to the U.S. was confirmed March 17 in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas and is 146 miles away from the border. According to the Screwworm.gov website , there are 1,433 active cases of NWS in Mexico as of April 1.

“There was an isolated case in Nuevo Leon last September that was about 70 miles away from the border,” a USDA spokesperson confirms. “There have not been any cases within 100 miles of the border since then.”

Dan Basse, AgResource Co. president, says he is growing increasingly concerned as the threat of NWS edges closer to the U.S. border.

“I’m becoming more pessimistic as each day goes by,” Basse says. “Seasonally, the fly moves northward, and it’s not that far away.”

Biosecurity Versus Supply Pressures

According to Jim Wiesemeyer, host of the “Wiesemeyer’s Perspectives” podcast and a Washington analyst, the reopening debate is being driven by two competing dynamics:

Biosecurity risk remains the primary constraint.
Market pressures are intensifying.

“Tight U.S. feeder cattle supplies and operational strain on Southwest feedyards are increasing pressure on USDA to restore imports from Mexico, a key supply source for the region,” Wiesemeyer explains.

Basse estimates roughly 120,000 head per month that would typically move into the U.S. are currently being held in Mexico, further tightening already constrained supplies.

“I don’t know how APHIS [USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service] can open the border today,” he says.

Rollins says keeping the borders closed has been instrumental in keeping NWS out of the U.S.

“I think they [Mexico’s government] would have been good partners, whether we close the ports or not, but I know for sure they have been much better partners because those ports have been closed,” Rollins says.

Adis Dijab, DVM and veterinary services associate deputy administrator for APHIS, says Moore Air Base is the hub of the U.S. expansion for sterile NWS flies . He says the dispersal facility is operational and the production plant is scheduled to be built and fully online by 2027 — aiming for 300 million sterile flies per week. On Jan. 30, USDA announced a shift in its 100 million-per-week sterile fly dispersal efforts to reinforce coverage along the U.S.-Mexico border.

What Would a Phased Reopening Mean for U.S. Beef Producers?

“I suspect the futures market will react pretty significantly,” says Derrell Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension livestock marketing specialist. “But the fact of the matter is this is not that big a deal. It’s not going to cause an immediate impact of any kind at this point in time.”

David Anderson, Texas A&M professor and Extension specialist for livestock and food product marketing, agrees, saying reopening the border will not fundamentally make a huge difference for the U.S. producer.

“There is not really a flood of animals waiting to come this way,” he explains. “While cattle would be imported it should not have a huge effect on the market. A little more supplies and a little impact on price. It should take a while for imports to ramp up. Phased means a slow reopening, so that implies a slow or small effect on numbers and prices.”

Peel predicts cattle flow from Mexico would trickle, not surge, especially going into the summer heat period when movements usually tail off.

Other constraints that Peel says will limit cattle crossing the border include:

Understaffing and loss of USDA APHIS personnel at ports could be a bottleneck.
Prior abrupt closures have eroded Mexican producers’ confidence, so they’re unlikely to rush cattle north without proof the border will stay open.
Mexico is investing and adapting internally, which could permanently change traditional movement patterns and how much and how quickly cattle flow to the U.S. even after reopening.

“Long term, if we return eventually to normal things, then, you know, that does add some supply back into our feeder cattle supplies,” Peel says. “But that’s all going to take months. I mean, it really doesn’t happen much this year. ... We’re probably talking about next year.”

Don Close, senior animal protein analyst at Terrain Ag, says the biggest impact will be psychological.

“Because the futures market is an anticipatory market, and [if] we ever have any border opening, the market’s going to perceive more numbers to come down the road, so that’s where that psychological impact could come from,” he explains.

He predicts the real story will be a North American cattle shortage, not just a U.S. shortage, due to drought also experienced in Mexico.

The positive impact, according to Anderson, will be for Southwestern U.S. feeders.

He says more supplies of cattle would eventually help the packer keep shifts going to help some plants survive, but when Mexican cattle come across the border, they are “a long way off from finishing.” It will not be immediate relief for the packer.

“I don’t think it’s an immediate impact except in the futures market, because it always reacts immediately and then figures it out and recorrects later,” Anderson says. “It would help boost beef supplies for the consumer — many months down the road. I don’t think this helps enough to offset the increase in gas and diesel prices and the longer-term impact of these costs on our production and marketing system.”

No Need to Panic

Should beef producers be concerned about a potential phased reopening of U.S.-Mexico border?

“I would say this is not something to panic about,” Anderson summarizes. “There are a lot of positives for cattle producers, especially in the Southwest, and the truckers, feed stores, markets and others who are part of the cattle industry in the Southwest.”

He emphasizes, “I think one real benefit is the inspection and surveillance that happens at the border that is a real positive to have a better idea of what is going on.”

Close’s message to producers is that a border reopening would likely cause a short-term, mostly psychological softening in feeder prices, but it won’t solve the broader North American cattle shortage, so any relief will be limited and temporary.

The message from industry analysts is not to panic, but to steady the ship, manage risk and prepare for NWS.

Your Next Reads:

Rollins Promotes Product of USA Label, Announces Support of MCOOL

Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:03:27 GMT

USDA is launching a national public awareness campaign to inform meat, poultry and egg producers of the “ Product of USA ” voluntary labeling standard, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, and increases consumer understanding of what the label means.

In a press release , Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins says, “Our great patriot ranchers and producers grow, raise, and harvest the world’s safest, most affordable, and abundant food supply. American consumers want to support America by buying American and this label will strengthen our food supply chain through transparency, fairness, and trust. This new standard policy ensures producers who invest in a fully American supply chain can compete fairly, and it gives consumers the confidence they deserve about the food they bring home.”

The “Product of USA” label is reserved exclusively for meat, poultry and egg products from animals that were born, raised, harvested and processed in the U.S. The claim is voluntary, but companies using it must meet this transparent and verifiable requirement. This ends the prior practice that allowed imported products to carry the claim after minimal processing and strengthens consumer confidence by aligning with what Americans expect and demand.

Friday’s announcement on enforcement and promotion of the strengthened “Product of USA” label is a key deliverable under this initiative, advancing the Trump administration’s priorities of fairness, competition and consumer trust.

Rollins: “Big Supporter” of MCOOL

Rollins says she is a “big supporter” of mandatory country-of-origin labeling (MCOOL) for U.S. meat products.

According to Agri-Pulse’s April 1 Daybreak , Rollins shared her support with reporters prior to a grazing roundtable discussing the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to modernize federal grazing management on Tuesday.

Verifying her comments were intended for MCOOL and not in reference to the voluntary labeling rule, a USDA spokesperson says, “Yes, we can confirm the Secretary’s comments yesterday in support of MCOOL.”

Rollins says she considers the issue one of consumer transparency rather than market intervention.

“It’s just a transparency question,” she explains.

According to the USDA website , COOL is a consumer labeling law that requires retailers (most grocery stores and supermarkets) to identify the country of origin on certain foods referred to as “covered commodities.” The 2002 and 2008 farm bills and the 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act amended the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 to require retailers to notify their customers of the country of origin of muscle cuts and ground lamb, chicken, goat, wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish, perishable agricultural commodities, peanuts, pecans, ginseng and macadamia nuts.

While in place for some products, MCOOL for beef and pork was repealed in 2015 following World Trade Organization (WTO) disputes. Efforts like the American Beef Labeling Act are actively trying to bring it back.

What is the New Grazing MOU?

Tue, 31 Mar 2026 17:45:09 GMT

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins and Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum have signed a historic Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to modernize federal grazing management and boost the domestic beef supply. This agreement bridges the gap between the U.S. Forest Service (FS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to cut bureaucratic red tape, streamline grazing permits and ensure “no net loss” of grazing capacity for the 20,000 American ranchers across 28 states who graze on federal lands.

FS and the BLM are responsible for a total of 240 million acres of federal rangelands. The two agencies together administer more than 23,000 permits and leases held by ranchers who graze their livestock on approximately 29,000 allotments. About 10% of grazing allotments, or roughly 24 million acres, are not under permit but are targeted as opportunities to allow more grazing on federal lands. The FS collects an average of $6 million annually in grazing fees.

Modernizing the Forest Service and BLM Partnership

According to a USDA press release , the agreement formalizes collaboration between the USDA and the Department of the Interior to ensure more efficient, transparent and responsive management across federal lands. By building on the recently released Grazing Action Plan , the agencies aim to eliminate costly bureaucracy and lower consumer prices.

“Today’s signing sends a clear message: the Trump administration is putting America’s farmers and ranchers first,” Rollins says. “Building on our action plan for American ranchers announced in the fall, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management are already delivering.”

Burgum adds the partnership is dedicated to strengthening ranching operations while safeguarding public lands.

“By working closely with American ranchers, we are enhancing communication, investing in innovation and modernizing our approach to land management practices to deliver real results for the people who feed and sustain this country,” he says.

A “No Net Loss” Mandate for Animal Unit Months (AUMs)

A central pillar of the MOU is the commitment to maintaining grazing capacity wherever possible. The agreement affirms a goal of “no net loss” of animal unit months (AUMs) within allotments.

To support this, federal agencies will look to expand practical land management tools, including the reopening of vacant allotments. Currently, about 10% of grazing allotments — roughly 24 million acres — are not under permit and represent a significant opportunity to increase domestic beef production.

For generations, ranchers have played a vital role in feeding the nation, supporting rural economies and stewarding public lands. The MOU recognizes permittees as essential partners and directs federal agencies to engage directly with those who live and work on the land.

Bridging the Gap Between Agencies and Producers

To foster a deeper understanding of the industry, the MOU introduces “Ranch Immersion” programs for federal employees. These initiatives will place agency staff on working ranches to build firsthand knowledge of operational challenges. Additionally, the agreement focuses on:

Structured Engagement: Expanding collaboration through learning roundtables.
Data Access: Improving data systems to make allotment information more predictable for producers.
Streamlined Permitting: Reducing delays for infrastructure improvements and permit renewals.

Wildfire Response: New Liaisons for Grazing Permittees

Recognizing the constant threat of wildfire to Western rangelands, the MOU establishes grazing permittee wildfire liaisons. These liaisons will ensure ranchers have a direct point of contact and a voice during both wildfire response and recovery efforts. Furthermore, the agreement promotes the use of targeted grazing as a tool to reduce fuel loads and mitigate wildfire risk, alongside the adoption of innovative technologies like virtual fencing.

According to the USDA press release , the agreement supports not only producers, but also American families by strengthening the domestic food supply chain. By lowering costs and improving efficiency for ranchers, the initiative helps keep food affordable and reduces reliance on foreign imports.

“Today’s signing marks an important step forward in modernizing federal grazing management and reflects a broader commitment to rural prosperity by fortifying the American beef industry as directed by President Trump’s order Ensuring Affordable Beef for the American Consumer ,” the release says.

Ranchers Called, Agencies Answered

Public lands ranchers joined Secretaries Rollins and Burgum as they signed the MOU to launch their Grazing Action Plan.

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) and Public Lands Council (PLC) leaders and members then participated in a roundtable discussing cooperative work to address longstanding challenges for federal lands grazing permittees. PLC President Tim Canterbury, PLC Past President Mark Roeber and Industry Issues Committee Chairman Nate Thomson were joined by NCBA President-elect Kim Brackett, American National CattleWomen (ANCW) Past President Nikki Weston, Washington ranchers Stephanie and Nick Martinez, Arizona permittee Dan Bell, and Colorado rancher Nancy Roberts in raising critical ranching issues to be addressed.

“Public lands ranchers are resilient by nature, but we still need significant relief from the burdensome federal regulations that make it harder to do our jobs every day. This MOU will make it easier to ranch on public lands and will help improve the health of western landscapes,” Canterbury says. “By speeding up the permitting process and expanding the use of targeted grazing, the federal government is ensuring that more ranchers will keep ranching and that rangelands will face less degradation and destruction from wildfires and mismanagement.”

This plan focuses on boosting rancher resiliency by assessing vacant allotments, unifying permitting frameworks between agencies, expanding the use of targeting grazing to prevent wildfires, and establishing a rancher liaison program for wildfire incident command centers.

“When you raise cattle on federal lands, it requires a great deal of work to sort through the government red tape. This plan will cut bureaucracy by streamlining the permitting process, expanding grazing access, and optimizing targeted grazing in areas that are the most vulnerable to wildfires,” Brackett explains. “This MOU will provide much needed regulatory relief to ranchers and make it easier for us to carry out the voluntary conservation essential to maintaining these working lands.”

Your Next Read:
Beef Producers React to USDA’s Plan to Fortify Industry and Trump’s Social Media Comments

House Ag Committee Starts Farm Bill Mark Up

Mon, 02 Mar 2026 16:24:41 GMT

The push to get a five-year farm bill has been renewed in the House Ag Committee as Chairman G.T. Thompson released language and mark up began on Tuesday.

One Big Beautiful Bill Omits Farm Bill Titles

While some question why a new long term farm bill is needed, a cross section of the nation’s farm groups explain the bill did not cover all the titles normal included in a long-term farm bill.

“We had a lot of the provisions of the farm bill that were included in the One Big Beautiful Bill — the increase in reference prices, some changes and improvements to crop insurance, etc. But there’s still some really important aspects of the farm bill that need to be passed,” says Steve Censky, chief executive officer of the American Soybean Association.

Sam Kieffer, chief executive officer of the National Association of Wheat Growers, points out the One Big Beautiful Bill did not touch the conservation title or reauthorize programs like the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Nor did the legislation deal with credit or expand farm loan limits.

“It is time to give our folks some certainty when it comes to conservation programs, when it comes to credit. The cost of doing business is drastically different than it was in 2018. And the 2018 Farm Bill was based off of data from three, four years prior. So, we want to make sure that we improve the credit section of of the farm bill, get that finished,” Kieffer says.

Farm Safety Net Needed

Kieffer adds a farm bill is also needed to provide certainty to farmers and offer a farm safety net in times of negative margins.

“There’s three years of market loss that our growers are struggling with at the moment, and they’re making hard decisions. Some of them are reducing acres, some of them are letting land go and there’s a price to be paid for that as well,” Kieffer says.

House Ag Committee Language Includes Prop 12 Ag Labeling Uniformity Act

Chairman Thompson’s farm bill language includes a Ag Labeling Uniformity Act, which covers pesticide registrations, according to Censky.

“Which means that the EPA is going to have preeminence when they make a health and safety determination of a pesticide, a crop protection product. You can’t have a state adopt different rules,” Censky says.

The House language also includes a national fix to California’s strict Prop 12 sow production standards and the possible patchwork of rules in other states.

However, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) would lose around $1 billion in budget authority over the next four fiscal years under the House Agriculture Committee’s GOP farm bill draft, according to calculations by the Congressional Budget Office. EQIP was essentially used as a funding source for other priorities in the legislation.

Include Food for Peace Program

Kieffer says NAWG also wants Congress to move the Food for Peace Program to USDA in the language of the Farm Bill.

“USDA knows how to deal with farm commodities. USDA is already in the business of engaging in food aid programs globally. They have the infrastructure. They have the personnel and they understand agriculture. So, the farm bill that is ready to be moved in the house here soon has a provision that would include that,” Kieffer adds.

Senate Preparing for Farm Bill Mark Up

While the Senate Agriculture Committee has not released farm bill language or scheduled a mark-up, chairman John Boozman told Agri-Pulse his committee will take up a farm bill of its own in the coming months. Timing will be dependent in part on how debate over a House version proceeds.

Will Congress Pass a Farm Bill?

Still there’s uncertainty about the appetite for passage of a farm bill in Congress according to Tim Lust, chief executive officer of National Sorghum Producers.

“A lot of these details honestly have been negotiated for a year or two, and it’s maybe little tweaks to them, but a lot of the main things haven’t really changed. It’s a matter of how do we get that across the finish line and find a way to get it signed into law?” he says.

New World Screwworm: An Infestation, Not Infection

Wed, 04 Feb 2026 22:53:01 GMT

New World Screwworm (NWS) is an infestation of individual animals, not a herdwide infection like many diseases. Finding one infested animal does not automatically mean the whole herd is infested.

“This is not infection,” explains Adis Dijab, DVM and veterinary services associate deputy administrator for USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). “When you talk about infection, there is a potential that every single animal is infected. In this case, it’s [the] infestation of one animal; you can check the rest of your animals and they can be fine.”

What does this mean for operations? If NWS does cross the border, quarantine and movement controls will be designed to inspect and treat affected animals. Dijab says this means producers can clear the rest of the herd as quickly as possible, and there will be a pathway to continue business, not a blanket, long‑term stop on all movement — assuming cooperation and inspections.

APHIS will try to avoid blanket shutdowns by targeted zoning and quick pathways out of quarantine after inspection and treatment.

Dijab gave a NWS update during the cattle health and well-being committee at CattleCon. Here are four key points from his presentation:

1. What NWS is and why it’s dangerous

NWS is a parasitic fly whose larvae require living tissue to feed.
Its life cycle is 21 days but can be longer in colder climates.
The fly is not active around 40°F.
NWS flies prefer water, shade greenery and hosts.
They typically move only about 3 km (approximately 1.6–1.7 miles) per day if they must; they are not strong long‑distance flyers.

Dijab shares the top 10 conditions leading to myiasis in Mexico, with umbilical being No. 1.

(Data source: COPEG)

2. Current NWS Spread Pattern in Mexico Strongly Suggests Illegal Movement of Animals, Not Just Fly Movement

“One of the primary modes of movement of this fly is not flying of the fly; it’s a set of 18 wheels doing probably 60 or 70 [mph] down the road,” Dijab says. “Southern Veracruz had a pretty healthy number of the cases. Then suddenly it jumped into the middle of Tamaulipas, which clearly showed there was illegal movement.”

Due to this concern, USDA took the proactive action to start dispersing sterile flies in the southeast corner of Texas as well.

3. Sterile Insect Technique Is Key

The U.S. has long relied on sterile insect release as its primary eradication tool.
Panama facility (COPECA) currently produces approximately 100 million sterile pupae a week.
“This is what’s keeping us alive right now,” Dijab says. “This is the reason that we don’t have a New World Screwworm on the U.S. soil.”
A new U.S. facility is planned at Moore Air Base in South Texas. Dijab says the construction award is targeted for March/April, with an operational goal of 300-million sterile flies a week by 2027. He adds they expect a six-to-eight-month ramp‑up.
The U.S. is collaborating with Mexico in remodeling a fruit-fly facility in Metapa, Chiapas. The U.S. is investing approximately $21 million. The goal is 100 million sterile flies a week, with first output expected late summer.
The combined goal is approximately 500 million sterile flies a week, similar to volumes used in the 1990s’ eradication to the Darién Gap.

Dijab summarizes that APHIS is rebuilding and expanding sterile fly capacity to historical eradication levels, which is essential for long‑term regional control and eventual border reopening.

4. The U.S. is Using a Layered Defense: Strict Import Controls, Active Surveillance and Border Trapping to Detect Any Incursion Early

The two main surveillance streams are:

The Foreign Animal Disease Diagnostician (FADD) network of 400 trained federal and state veterinarians.
Trap lines along the U.S.-Mexico border, placed near water, livestock and greenery.

Dijab says that, since June, there have been more than 300 FAD NWS investigations, with zero findings so far and more than 900 hide/wildlife inspections. He adds that what scares him the most regarding NWS is wildlife.

Read More: The Importance of Wildlife Monitoring for New World Screwworm

U.S. Begins Dropping Sterile Flies in Texas to Stop Screwworm

Sat, 31 Jan 2026 04:03:31 GMT

New World screwworm (NWS) is inching closer to the U.S. Last week Mexico reported eight new cases in the U.S. neighboring-state of Tamaulipas. A key to slowing down the threat is being proactive.

U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) import requirements and protocols are one line of defense for NWS and other foreign animal diseases that threaten U.S. livestock. According to USDA , earlier this week, a horse from Argentina was presented for routine importation at an equine import quarantine facility in Florida.

“Upon examination, APHIS identified an open wound with larvae on the animal and promptly collected and shipped samples to the National Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Iowa. The horse was immediately treated with medication to kill any larvae in accordance with standard, long-standing import protocols.” the release explains . “This morning, NVSL confirmed that the larvae were NWS larvae. Accordingly, the animal will remain in quarantine until it has been reexamined and determined to be free of NWS.”

This is an example of import protocols working as designed. While this situation does not appear to be associated with the NWS outbreak in Mexico, the release says it underscores the need for vigilance in all of USDA’s coordinated efforts to fight NWS.

New Action To Prevent Northward Spread

Friday, Jan. 30, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced a shift in its 100-million-per-week sterile fly dispersal efforts .

“USDA will reallocate aircraft and sterile insects to reinforce coverage along the U.S.-Mexico border,” according to the release. “The new dispersal area, or polygon, will include operations about 50 miles into Texas, along the U.S. border with the state of Tamaulipas, Mexico. Mass production and targeted dispersal of sterile insects are critical components of an effective strategy to fight NWS. Other tools including import protocols and surveillance continue to support these robust efforts to keep NWS out of the U.S.”

Dudley Hoskins, USDA undersecretary of marketing and regulatory programs, says, “At Secretary Rollins’ direction, our highest priority is protecting the United States from screwworm. The northernmost active case of NWS in Mexico is still about 200 miles away from the border, but we’ve seen cases continue to spread in Tamaulipas and further south in Mexico, so we are proactively shifting our polygon as we make every effort to prevent NWS from reaching our border.”

This follows Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s actions on Thursday issuing a statewide disaster declaration to better equip the Texas NWS Response Team to prevent the potential spread of the NWS fly into Texas and to better protect livestock and wildlife.

“Although the New World screwworm fly is not yet present in Texas or the U.S., its northward spread from Mexico toward the U.S. southern border poses a serious threat to Texas’ livestock industry and wildlife,” said Governor Abbott. “State law authorizes me to act to prevent a threat of infestation that could cause severe damage to Texas property, and I will not wait for such harm to reach our livestock and wildlife. With this statewide disaster declaration, the Texas NWS Response Team can fully utilize all state government prevention and response resources to prevent the re-emergence of this destructive parasite. Texas is prepared to fully eradicate this pest if need be.”

Sterile Flies are Key to Stopping NWS

Sterile insect technique, when paired with surveillance, movement restrictions and education and outreach, is an effective tool for controlling and eradicating NWS. Female NWS flies only mate once in their lives, so if they mate with a sterile male, they lay unfertilized eggs that don’t hatch.

Releasing sterile flies just outside of affected areas helps ensure flies traveling to new areas will only encounter sterile mates and will not be able to reproduce.

The updated strategy will include: “USDA will release sterile flies north of the current active NWS cases in Mexico in a proactive effort to create a sterile reproduction buffer zone if the fly moves north from Mexico.”

Because it is important to continue ongoing surveillance efforts while releasing sterile insects, it is possible that sterile NWS flies could be caught and/or reported within Texas. To ensure officials can tell the difference between sterile and wild NWS flies, USDA will dye the sterile pupae, and the dye will transfer to the sterile flies when they hatch. The fluorescent dye will glow under UV light and may also be visible to the naked eye. If a sterile fly is captured in a trap, this dye will allow animal health officials to quickly rule the fly out as a threat.

“USDA will continue to deploy its intensive NWS response efforts including implementing import protocols, ongoing surveillance and trapping efforts along the border, investing in NWS innovation, and supporting robust response activities in Mexico and Central America,” the release says.

Surveillance, Monitoring and Reporting Continues

USDA continues to lead intensive surveillance and monitoring systems along the U.S. border. Teams continue to check 121 NWS-specific traps across high-risk areas of border states and leverage thousands of fruit fly/insect traps aligned all along the Southern border. To date, more than 42,000 flies from traps in all locations have been submitted to APHIS NVSL for identification, with no NWS detections to date.

APHIS Wildlife Services is also leading a coordinated effort to inspect wildlife for signs of NWS infestation. To date, they’ve inspected more than 9,300 wild animals across 39 different species and 131 U.S. counties and found no signs of NWS infestations.

Texas Takes Preemptive Action

The Texas release says Governor Abbott actions against the threat posed by NWS include:

Directing the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) and the Texas Animal Health Commission (TAHC) to establish a joint Texas NWS Response Team.
Partnering with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Secretary Brooke Rollins to create a new $750 million Domestic Sterile NWS Production Facility in Edinburg, Texas.

“I’m glad to see the urgency from the governor’s office matching the seriousness of this threat,” says Texas Ag Commissioner Sid Miller. “The Governor’s disaster declaration gives his task force greater authority, resources, and speed needed to confront the growing threat posed by the New World screwworm. This is a serious risk to our livestock industry and one that the Texas Department of Agriculture has been preparing for through our own heightened surveillance, coordination, and response planning.”

Miller adds, “This fight requires every available resource to be thrown at it without delay, and TDA will continue to work alongside our state and federal partners to protect our livestock, pets, wildlife, and Texas communities.”

For more information on NWS and USDA’s efforts, visit Screwworm.gov

U.S. Cattle Inventory Hits 75-Year Low at 86.2 Million Head

Fri, 30 Jan 2026 21:08:06 GMT

As of Jan. 1, 2026, the U.S. beef cattle herd stands at 86.2 million head, continuing a downward trend. Despite a year of strong prices, USDA’s annual Cattle Inventory Report released Friday shows the U.S. cattle inventory shrank another 0.35% and now sits at its smallest size in 75 years.

“I would say the story continues,” summarizes Derrell Peel, extension livestock marketing specialist from Oklahoma State University. “I mean, it really doesn’t change the pattern that we’ve been in for the last three years now.”

Quick Report Stats:

Total Cattle and Calves Inventory: 86.2 million head (Down 0.35%)
Beef Cow Herd: 27.6 million head (Down 1%)
2025 Calf Crop: 32.9 million head (Smallest since 1941)
Beef Replacement Heifers: 4.71 million head (Up 1%)

Patrick Linnell, CattleFax director of market research, calls the report bullish.

“I think the big picture message of this report is expansion, while there was some signs of it within this report, by and large expansion remains elusive at this point,” he says.

What Are the Big Takeaways from the USDA Report?

According to Peel, the data highlights two critical areas:

1. Shrinking Cow Herd: The beef cow inventory fell 1% to 27.6 million head.
“The industry technically got a little smaller in 2025,” Peel says.

Linnell adds, “As you looked at just how tight beef cow slaughter was this past year, us and other groups had expected we would actually see an increase in the beef cow herd. Small, but an increase nonetheless. However, that’s not what this report showed.”

2. Heifer Retention Signs: Beef replacement heifers rose 1% to 4.71 million.
“There was a slight uptick in beef replacement heifers, not enough to amount to any growth in 2026, or probably even in 2027, but maybe it’s the beginnings [of a rebuild].”

John Nalivka, Sterling Marketing Inc. president, says the report indicates while replacement heifers was up 1% and those expected to calve were also up 1% from 2024 or 17% of the beef cow herd.

“From 2015 to 2018 when producers began aggressively building herds, the average number of heifers that were identified as replacements on the Jan. 1 inventory was 6.2 million or an average heifer retention rate of 21%,” he explains.

Nalivka says heifer slaughter during 2025, at 9.5 million, was down 7% from the prior year but still represented 52% of the heifers weighing more than 500 lb. on Jan. 1, 2025. In 2024, the industry slaughtered 56% of the January 1 heifers weighing more than 500 lb.

“When the industry was retaining heifers to build herds, the percentage of heifers weighing over 500 lb. that were slaughtered ranged from 39% to 49%,” he adds.

Why is the 2025 Calf Crop Significant?

The calf crop estimate was reduced to 32.9 million head — a 2% drop from 2024. This marks the smallest U.S. calf crop since 1941. This scarcity will be the primary driver for market dynamics in the coming years.

The calf crop in 1941 was approximately 31.8 million head. While the industry saw a significant liquidation in 2014, the calf crop that year only dropped to roughly 33.5 million. This means the current contraction has pushed production levels back more than 80 years.

Outlook: What Will Cattle and Beef Prices Do in 2026?

Peel predicts the small calf crop and tightening feeder supplies will push prices even higher.

“We’ve got record-high prices, and we’re going to see them push even higher for cattle and beef,” Peel says.

He reminds producers it’s important to keep in mind that it’s not just about supply.

“Demand has also continued to be remarkably good for beef as prices have gone up,” he says. “Beef prices have increased relative to pork and poultry. There are alternative proteins that consumers could be turning to, and they’re not. So that’s a very positive sign from a beef industry standpoint.”

The “Historically Slow” Rebuild

Unlike the rapid expansion seen 10 years ago, Peel expects this cycle to be much slower. Producers are cautious, remembering how quickly record prices vanished in the past.

“I do think we’re probably beginning, but it’s certainly not a concerted effort,” Peel says. “There’s not a strong, broad-based initiative in the industry. It will probably grow, but I think it’s going to continue to grow pretty slowly.”

He explains the industry has outlasted the previous cycle highs by two-plus years.

“I think producers are coming around to the idea that this is a more sustained story,” Peel says.

What is the Take-Home Message for Producers?

The market is signaling a desperate need for a rebuild.

“The incentive is there, the value of forage is there,” he says. “If you’ve got forage you can use to raise calves, the market wants you to do that. And if you aren’t fully stocked, then it’s encouraging you to think about doing that. I think the main message for producers is to take advantage of this market.”

He also encourages producers to maintain the productivity of their herds.

“We have cut cow culling so far in the last two to three years that some of these cows are going to have to be culled going forward,” he explains. “So, we got to have a few more replacement heifers just to maintain the productivity of the herd. Take care of that first and then if you need to restock. I understand the tradeoff between selling them now for what is a record price versus investing in the future, but you know, sooner or later, we have to make that investment and look a little bit farther down the road.”

Other January cattle report highlights include:

Of the 86.2 million head inventory of all cattle and calves, cows and heifers that have calved totaled 37.2 million.
The number of milk cows in the U.S. increased 2% to 9.57 million.
The number of cattle on feed was down 3% to 13.8 million.

Nalivka adds, “Only time will tell as the year progresses to determine if USDA’s Cattle Inventory is on track. One cross-check will be cattle slaughter which is an actual number reported to USDA by the packers. The inventory is generated from an annual survey number. I understand that USDA aligns annual surveys with the five-year Agricultural Census. To say the least, I have greater confidence in numbers reported to USDA that can cross-check the validity of the survey.”

He does not expect the Cattle Inventory Report to have an impact on cattle numbers or the market going forward through 2026 and into 2027, particularly with a 2% smaller 2025 calf crop.

“Numbers will continue to tighten and when coupled with continued strong demand for beef will support the market at levels at and likely above the market peak seen during third quarter 2025,” he summarizes.

Glynn Tonsor, Kansas State University ag economist, posted on LinkedIn his analysis of the report. He shares state-level beef cow inventory estimates (of seven states with more than 1 million head) Kansas’ 7% decline stands out while Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and Texas are estimated to be down 1-3% and Oklahoma and South Dakota are flat. Only Texas has a sizeable increase in estimated replacement heifers.

He shares two broader points:

While it certainly is valuable to count the number of beef cows, understand status of herd expansion, and other factors that is far from a complete story on industry supply dynamics. In short, the industry has implemented a number of efficiency gains resulting in the net effect of more edible beef production per cow in the industry.
It has become way too common to focus on supply and overlook demand dynamics. In fact, recent work with Brian Coffey documents how recent beef price patterns have been impacted more by strong consumer beef demand than any supply-side adjustments .

Analyzing the inventory numbers Peel summarizes, “It’s just amazing to me that we continue down this path. We’ve kept extending the timeline. You know, technically, with the beef cow herd and the way we look at cattle cycles, I thought 2025 would turn out to be officially the low. Well, now we’re even smaller in 2026, so we will have to wait until next year’s number to see whether this is the low. We just keep pushing this timeline out that provides even more opportunities for producers to take advantage of this market.”

Bi-annual Cattle report would be called lightly positive. 1) There was no sign of any type of January 2015 expansion (retained beef heifers +9.5%). 2) Overall, numbers came in just below the four analyst expectation. pic.twitter.com/lvNaDBusz3
— Rich Nelson (@RichNelsonMkts) January 30, 2026

To obtain an accurate measurement of the current state of the U.S. cattle industry, NASS surveyed approximately 35,000 operators across the nation during the first half of January. Surveyed producers were asked to report their cattle inventories as of Jan. 1, 2026, and calf crop for the entire year of 2025 by internet, mail, telephone or in-person interview.

Your Next Reads:
Tightest Cattle Supply Predicted in The Next 60 to 90 Days
CattleFax Predicts Profitability Despite Increased Uncertainty

USDA Announces New World Screwworm Grand Challenge

Wed, 21 Jan 2026 21:47:36 GMT

Today, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins announced the launch of the N ew World Screwworm (NWS) Grand Challenge. This funding opportunity marks a pivotal step in USDA’s comprehensive strategy to combat NWS and prevent its northward spread.

“This is a strategic investment in America’s farmers and ranchers and is an important action to ensure the safety and future success of our food supply, which is essential to our national security,” Rollins says. “These are the kinds of innovations that will help us stay ahead of this pest and protect our food supply and our economy, protecting the way of life of our ranchers and go towards rebuilding our cattle herd to lower consumer prices on grocery store shelves. We know we have tried-and-true tools and methods to defeat this pest, but we must constantly look for new and better methods and innovate our way to success. Together, through science, innovation, and collaboration, we can ensure we’re utilizing the latest tools and technology to combat NWS in Mexico and Central America and keep it out of the United States.”

As part of the Grand Challenge, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will make up to $100 million available to support innovative projects that enhance sterile NWS fly production, strengthen preparedness and response strategies, and safeguard U.S. agriculture, animal health, and trade.

Priority Areas for Funding

APHIS invites proposals that support one or more of the following objectives:

Enhance sterile NWS fly production
Develop novel NWS traps and lures
Develop and increase understanding of NWS therapeutics/treatments (i.e., products that could treat, prevent, or control NWS) for animals
Develop other tools to bolster preparedness or response to NWS

The notice of funding opportunity, including application instructions, eligibility, and program requirements, is available on the NWS Grand Challenge webpage . Applicants can also find information on the ezFedGrants website  or  Grants.gov  by searching USDA-APHIS-10025-OA000000-26-0001.  

Eligible applicants are invited to submit proposals that align with and support these priorities by the deadline on February 23, 2026, at 11:59 p.m. ET.

Entities interested in submitting a proposal should ensure they are registered with the  U.S. Government System for Award Management (SAM) . Learn more about the basics of the funding process and  how to get ready to apply .  

Your Next Reads:
New World Screwworm Found in Newborn Calf 197 Miles from U.S.-Mexico Border
USDA Launches Screwworm.gov
The Smell You’ll Never Forget: A Calf Infested with New World Screwworm

'Dust Bowl' Agency at USDA Looks to Cut Red Tape and Speed Up Slow Computers That Frustrate Farmers

Tue, 20 Jan 2026 19:55:34 GMT

USDA’s reorganization plan in 2025 drew criticism over the number of job cuts and headcount reduction’s potential impact on farmers, with fears it would hinder field office staff and county offices, many of which were already understaffed. However, third-generation California farmer Aubrey Bettencourt, who’s now serving as chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), says those local constraints aren’t due to staff reductions. She says those issues stem from outdated infrastructure and processes that are creating bottlenecks for farmers and ranchers trying to sign up for programs through USDA agencies such as NRCS. And that’s something she’s now working to change.

By any measure, Bettencourt did not come to Washington to keep things the same. But then, her background for a government official isn’t that traditional either. Bettencourt was raised on her family’s farm in Hanford, Calif. But her political interest really started with her efforts to help lead California’s fight over water.

During the first Trump administration, she first served as the state executive director for USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA). She was then selected to work with both the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and USDA as a deputy assistant secretary with the DOI, where she oversaw water and science policy.

Bettencourt says conservation policy has never been theoretical for her. Instead, it is personal and it is operational, as she’s experienced the frustration firsthand with the slow speed at which many USDA agencies were forced to work.

As she entered into her role as chief of NRCS, Bettencourt says the changes she’s working to implement are about time and how much of it farmers lose navigating paperwork and how much time NRCS staff lose staring at what she calls the “spinning wheel of death” on outdated systems.

“I’ve always said my whole goal has been to keep farmers farming, get water to people who need it, take care of the resources that take care of all of us, and have high-speed internet everywhere in the United States, the indoor plumbing of the 21^st century,” Bettencourt says. “NRCS gets to do all of that.”

Now, nearly 90 years after the agency was created in response to the Dust Bowl, Bettencourt says NRCS is again confronting a foundational threat. This time, it is not erosion or war but the pace at which farmland is disappearing and the friction farmers face trying to stay productive on what remains.

“We are losing 5,000 acres of farmland a day in the United States,” she says. “Two thousand acres of prime farmland a day.”

To meet that challenge, Bettencourt is driving sweeping internal reforms, many of them invisible to farmers at first glance, that aim to reduce the number of times producers have to sign up, re-sign up, re-enter data or wait for answers. The goal, she says, is to get NRCS staff out from behind desks and back into the field, and to make USDA work at the speed agriculture actually operates.

From Policy to Processing, NRCS Is Undergoing Rapid Change

One of the most consequential changes underway is how NRCS processes applications for its flagship programs, EQIP (Environmental Quality Incentives Program) and CSP (Conservation Stewardship Program). Bettencourt explains years of layering subcategories, scenarios and hyper-specific ranking criteria slowed everything down, not just for farmers, but also for USDA field staff.

“The reason it took so long for us to get an answer back as a customer of ‘where is my application and where am I in this process’ is because we had so many individualized and subcategories and scenarios of practices that we would have to rank and score the application for every scenario, every single time,” she says

Rather than forcing applications through dozens of narrowly defined pathways, NRCS is shifting toward higher-level practice codes that still rely on vetted science but allow district conservationists, those who she says are closest to the land, to make judgment calls based on local conditions.

“I think it’s getting people to where they need to be, and it’s giving them the tools they need to be there. So one is freeing up time. Time is a huge component, and the ability for someone to have less time in front of a computer,” she says. “And the numbers, I kid you not, just by going to email notifications, we’re going to save 96,000 hours a year. 96,00 hours. Just by going to a singular ranking that then, you on your adventure. We’re going to save over 75,000 hours. That amount of time is a huge capacity builder for us, for our staff.”

Fixing the Infrastructure Farmers Never See

While some reforms focus on simplifying rules, Bettencourt points out some of the most significant barriers to faster program delivery have nothing to do with policy at all. They are physical and technological shortcomings inside USDA field offices, and problems farmers rarely see, but ones they often feel.

“I already knew we had rough bandwidth capacity at our offices,” Bettencourt says drawing on her experience at FSA. “What I didn’t realize is statistically how bad it was.”

She says industry standards call for five to eight megabits per second per person. Many NRCS offices, she says, operate with roughly 10 megabits total per office, regardless of whether that office has four employees or two dozen employees. She says the result is a system where applications stall through no fault of the farmer or the staff.

“You get your application in on time, and staff is working their rear ends off trying to get these things uploaded,” she points out. “And you miss out on the opportunity, not by any fault of your own, not by fault of the staff’s own, but because of a failure of the basic infrastructure to support the operations of our mission.”

As USDA programs have become more digital and data-heavy, those limitations have only been compounded. Bettencourt says improving connectivity might not sound exciting, but it is essential to restoring fairness and predictability in the process.

“It may sound boring. It may just sound not that sexy,” she says, “but it is so vitally important that we get the basic structure available to our staff, because that is doing respect to them and doing respect to our customer.”

The payoff, she says, is capacity. When staff are not losing hours to failed uploads and system delays, they can spend that time where it matters, and that’s working directly with farmers on conservation solutions.

“That’s how you build capacity,” Bettencourt says. “Not by asking people to work harder but by removing the friction.”

New Initiative Called ‘One Farmer, One File’

If infrastructure fixes address how fast data can move, the new “One Farmer, One File” initiative tackles how often that data has to move at all.

Bettencourt says USDA agencies routinely ask farmers for the same information, even though that data already exists elsewhere within the department, just often with a different agency within USDA.

“That’s why I have to fill out the same eligibility form twice,” she says. “That’s why I have to fill out the same direct deposit form twice. It makes no sense. It’s the exact same form with the same information.”

Working with FSA and RMA, NRCS is building a unified, protected back-end system that allows agencies to securely share core farmer information. Privacy protections remain unchanged, Bettencourt emphasizes, but usability improve dramatically.

“We share so much data between us to operate our different programs,” she adds. “But we don’t actually have it in one place where we can see it … It saves time, it saves energy and it saves my dad having to drive 50 miles back to the office to sign the same farm file that he signed four months earlier for FSA.”

For farmers who participate in multiple USDA programs, Bettencourt says redundancy has been a persistent barrier, especially during busy seasons. One Farmer, One File is designed to remove that friction by allowing USDA to view farmers holistically rather than as separate program participants.

“When we can see the farmer as a whole. It improves the customer experience, and it improves our operational capacity,” she says.

The More Talked About Issue: USDA Faces Major Workforce Shake-Up Amid Departures and Reorganization

The reality in 2026, though, is USDA has seen a sharp decline in staffing over the past year, with more than 20,000 employees leaving between mid-January and mid-June 2025, which was a 20% drop in total workforce during that time. Data also shows roughly 15,000 employees accepted voluntary buyouts through the Deferred Resignation Program, while others retired or resigned. Reports also show agencies such as NRCS and FSA experienced some of the steepest losses.

USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins announced the downsizing last summer and said she would oversee a rapid reorganization aimed at reducing bureaucracy. That included the relocation of 2,600 Washington-based staff to five regional hubs and aligning staffing with budget constraints. That relocation plan is still underway.

At the time, Rollins framed the restructuring as a move to make USDA “efficient, nimble and innovative” while bringing staff closer to rural farmers and ranchers.

“Over the last four years, USDA’s workforce grew by 8%, and employees’ salaries increased by 14.5%, including hiring thousands of employees with no sustainable way to pay them,” USDA’s announcement stated last summer. “This all occurred without any tangible increase in service to USDA’s core constituencies across the agricultural sector.”

Still, it’s those cuts that critics say will further strain field staff. But Bettencourt says it’s current changes underway with processes and infrastructure that will help relieve some of the time constraints on staff, ultimately getting staff back in front of farmers and bringing NRCS back to its roots as a field-based agency.

Bringing the Office to the Farmer

Through a new Integrated Field Tool, NRCS staff will be able to build conservation plans with farmers in real time, on the farm and in the field.

“Our staff will be able to go out in the field with you and design your farm plan in the field with you,” Bettencourt says. “Auto-populate your application, verify it, sign it, send it off and get the process going.”

Rather than requiring multiple office visits, Bettencourt says NRCS wants to reverse the dynamic.

“This will actually be a digital and mobile-based platform where our staff at NRCS will be able to go out in the field with you, the farmer, and design your farm plan in the field with you in real time and say, ‘All right, here’s your options. What would you like to focus on? Let’s go ahead and do these EQIP practices here, here and here. Let me auto-populate your farm and your application. Can you verify this is right for me? Great let’s go ahead and just sign that and send that off and get this process going,’ and we’ll be able to do that in the field with the farmer in real time,” she says. “Again that’s back where we should be; that’s where we’re working with you instead of, you know, trying to make you come to the office and go back and forth 9 million times. We’re just going to be out in the field and bring the office to you.”

County offices will still play a role, she says, but the future of NRCS is face-to-face where it’s convenient for farmers.

A New Sense of Urgency Inside USDA

Behind the scenes, Bettencourt says collaboration across the administration is happening at a pace she has not seen before, including with USDA’s recently announced $700 million Regenerative Ag Pilot Program , which will be administered through NRCS.

“The conversations are happening lightning fast, and there is that sense of urgency,” she says.

That urgency, she says comes from a shared understanding that redundancy, inconsistency and delay cost farmers real money.

“As a Californian, I pay for the privilege to farm to 86 separate agencies,” she adds. “I know that frustration.”

Her charge at NRCS is to ensure farmers feel the difference, not through press releases but through fewer forms, fewer trips to the office and faster answers.

“We’re judged by one lens every day,” Bettencourt says. “Farmer first, and how are we producing in practical and measurable terms?”

For Bettencourt, she says it’s vital NRCS gets back to the basics, which is exactly what this new plan intends to do.

You can watch the full episode of “Unscripted” on the Farm Journal YouTube page.

New Leadership to Take on Key Animal Health Roles at USDA

Tue, 13 Jan 2026 19:23:04 GMT

USDA announced major leadership changes within the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Michael Watson, APHIS administrator, will retire at the end of January after decades of distinguished service, and Rosemary Sifford, deputy administrator for veterinary services and U.S. chief veterinary officer, has also retired from federal service after a similarly notable career.

Dedicated Public Servants

Watson’s notable career reflects his unwavering commitment to safeguarding U.S. agriculture, building strong partnerships with states and stakeholders and mentoring future leaders. Beginning his USDA career in 1994 as a plant pathologist with the Agricultural Research Service, he later held key leadership roles across multiple APHIS programs. APHIS says Watson consistently championed science-based policy, ensuring APHIS decisions were grounded in rigorous data and research to protect U.S. agriculture and maintain public trust. His legacy is one of collaboration, integrity and dedication to public service.

Sifford began her USDA career in 1997 as a Saul T. Wilson Scholar and held numerous roles across APHIS. Under her leadership and guidance, APHIS advanced major animal health efforts, including combatting highly pathogenic avian influenza — with unprecedented detections in dairy cattle — and strengthening preparedness and response for New World screwworm. APHIS says her direction ensured these efforts were grounded in science-based policy, supported by field-ready guidance, and delivered with transparent stakeholder engagement. A steadfast champion of practical, proven biosecurity, she worked hard to protect animal health nationwide.

“Dr. Watson and Dr. Sifford are dedicated public servants and we greatly appreciate their time at USDA, serving American farmers and ranchers, and protecting the national security of the U.S. I am so grateful for their extended service to support the Trump administration during such a critical time for American agriculture,” says U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins in a news release. “The team at APHIS plays a critical role in protecting our food supply from foreign pests like the New World screwworm, as well as fighting diseases like bird flu. I have the utmost confidence in Ms. Moore, Dr. Huddleston and Dr. Dijab in continuing this critical mission and defending American agriculture.”

New Leadership

Starting Feb. 1, Kelly Moore will serve as acting administrator. Moore is currently acting chief operating officer for USDA’s marketing and regulatory programs mission area, and acting deputy administrator of marketing and regulatory programs business services.

“She brings extensive operational leadership experience and results-driven management, including a strong foundation of discipline from her prior service in the U.S. Marine Corps,” APHIS reports. “Ms. Moore is highly adept at guiding organizations through periods of change and transition and driving efficiency, compliance and innovation at scale — critical to APHIS’s mission during this pivotal time.”

Effective immediately, Dr. Alan Huddleston will serve as acting U.S. chief veterinary officer. With deep expertise in epidemiology and program development, he will represent U.S. animal health priorities internationally and maintain strong engagement with states and industry.

(USDA APHIS)

Dudley Hoskins, under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs, says their leadership and commitment to collaboration strengthened APHIS and the nation’s animal and plant health systems.

“These are consequential changes at a pivotal moment for the agency, and I am confident that Ms. Moore, Dr. Huddleston, and Dr. Dijab will not only serve as steady hands for program continuity but will lead APHIS into a new era,” Hoskins says.

To ensure continuity during this transition, APHIS veterinary services associate deputy administrator Adis Dijab will continue to provide operational oversight of veterinary services.

“APHIS operations continue uninterrupted, guided by science-based policies, strong stakeholder engagement and experienced acting leaders to ensure program continuity,” APHIS reports. “APHIS remains steadfast in its mission to protect the health, welfare and value of our Nation’s plants, animals, and natural resources — continuing to deliver solutions and essential services that safeguard U.S. agriculture and support stakeholders nationwide.”

New Dietary Guidelines Move Food Pyramid Closer to the Farm

Wed, 07 Jan 2026 20:43:25 GMT

The White House delivered a simple but clear message to Americans today: Eat real food.

“We are finally putting real food back at the center of the American diet. Real food that nourishes the body, restores health, fuels energy and builds strength,” says Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins. “This pivot also leans into the abundant, affordable and healthy food supply already available from America’s incredible farmers and ranchers. By making milk, raising cattle and growing wholesome fruits, vegetables and grains, they hold the key to solving our national health crisis.”

In the “most significant reset of federal nutrition policy in decades,” the White House released the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030 . The updated pyramid inverts the 1992 USDA version by prioritizing:

Protein (1.2 to 1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day, an increase from 0.8 grams)
Dairy and healthy fats as the foundation
Vegetables (3 servings per day)
Fruits (2 servings per day)

Unlike the old pyramid’s grain-heavy base and processed carbs, new recommendations limit whole grains to 2 to 4 servings per day and added sugars and highly processed oils should be avoided entirely.

Eat More Protein

Rollins says the previous dietary guidelines demonized protein in favor of carbohydrates.

“These guidelines reflect gold standard science by prioritizing high-quality, nutrient-dense protein foods in every meal,” Rollins says. “This includes a variety of animal sources, including eggs, poultry, seafood, and red meat, in addition to plant-sourced protein foods such as beans, peas, lentils, legumes, nuts, seeds and soy.”

To put the new protein recommendations into perspective, Sigrid Johannes, executive director of government affairs for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, says for folks who should be consuming 1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight that’s a 100% increase in recommended daily protein intake.

Dairy’s Seat at the Table

Dairy emerged in a strong position under the new dietary guidelines, with federal nutrition guidance supporting dairy at all fat levels for the first time.

“One of the key messages they’re telling consumers is eat dairy and eat dairy at all fat levels — that’s whole milk, cheese and butter,” says Matt Herrick of the International Dairy Foods Association. He calls it “a significant watershed moment,” reflecting how many families currently eat and shop today.

Echoing Herrick’s perspective, National Milk Producers Federation President and CEO Gregg Doud adds by better recognizing both fat and protein, the guidelines give a fuller picture of dairy’s nutritional value.

“Not all fats are created equal, and because the guidelines acknowledge this, dairy’s benefits are better reflected in this iteration of the guidelines,” Doud says.

When it comes to protein, consumer demand is reshaping the category, with cottage cheese at its highest level since the 1980s because of the high-protein trend, Herrick notes.

“Consumers are looking at labels more than ever and trying to find cleaner, less processed foods. Dairy fits that bill. Most products have just a handful of ingredients, and they’re all high in protein. People are turning to protein for growth, energy and overall health, and we’re going to continue to see consumers look to dairy to fulfill their protein and healthy fats needs,” Herrick says.

The processing sector has grown alongside the rising demand for dairy, reflecting both increased production and changing consumer preferences. Roughly $8 billion has been invested in new processing facilities from 2022 to 2025, with another $11 billion expected through 2028.

“We’re going to continue to see investments in processing facilities — new plants, updated lines and more capacity — to meet growing consumer demand for dairy protein and healthy fats,” Herrick notes.

Eat More Meat and Poultry

When it comes to meat and poultry, Julie Anna Potts, Meat Institute President and CEO, says Secretary Rollins and Secretary Kennedy’s leadership have simplified the dietary guidelines making it clear meat is a protein powerhouse.

“Robust scientific evidence demonstrates that meat is a rich source of high-quality protein, essential vitamins and highly bioavailable minerals that support human health throughout the lifespan,” Potts says.

Kansas beef producer Marisa Kleysteuber describes the new “commonsense” dietary guidelines as “exciting and refreshing.”

“As beef producers we are blessed to work with a ruminant animal that can utilize Mother Nature’s production of cellulose from rain and sunshine and then convert it to one of the most nutrient rich proteins there is,” she says. “Whether the consumer is desiring an organic, grass fed or corn fed beef product, there are cattlemen and women all over the U.S. who put their heart into raising these cattle to produce a nutritious and delicious product that we have always believed in and now our leaders are standing behind the ranchers and farmers of America.”

Quintessentially American foods such as burgers, steaks, pork chops and Easter hams can remain a staple of American households, and the guidelines go so far as to recommend parents introduce nutrient-dense foods, including meat, early and continue focusing on “nutrient-dense foods such as protein foods” throughout childhood.

“America’s pork producers appreciate the 2025 dietary guidelines putting pork front and center on the plate. They took note of producer concerns and rightly gave pork and other high-protein, nutrient-dense and delicious meats their due when it comes to Americans’ health and dietary habits,” says Rob Brenneman , National Pork Producers Council president-elect and pork producer from Washington, Iowa.

Maddie Hokanson , a Minnesota pork producer and mother of two, says the new dietary guidelines’ strong emphasis on protein is a positive for the pork industry. She believes the new guidelines, paired with pork’s quality nutrition and versatility, bring together the perfect opportunity to increase pork consumption and demand in the U.S.

“As pig farmers, we are proud to produce a meat product that is packed with high-quality protein, while also being nutrient-dense with many essential vitamins and minerals,” Hokanson says. “As a parent to young children, I see both the physical and cognitive benefits of prioritizing protein in the diet at all ages, and I’m excited to see what the short- and long-term effects of this recommendation will be.”

Three Servings of Veggies and Two Servings of Fruit

Dairy and meat weren’t the only items at the top of the new dietary pyramid. Fresh fruits and vegetables were also given top billing.

“Diets rich in vegetables and fruits reduce disease risk more effectively than many drugs,” says Robert F Kennedy Jr., Secretary of Health.

The new dietary guidelines recommend three servings of vegetables and two servings of fruit per day. Like past editions of the dietary guidelines , the new guidelines recommend Americans eat “a variety of colorful, nutrient-dense vegetables and fruits” and advises whole produce items be eaten “in their original form.” Though not explicitly stated, the updated guidelines also call out “frozen, dried, or canned vegetables or fruits with no or very limited added sugars” as good options.

“Today’s dietary guidelines reinforce the critical role fruits and vegetables play in overall health,” says Mollie Van Lieu, International Fresh Produce Association vice president of nutrition and health, in the group’s response. “Scientific evidence consistently shows that fruits and vegetables should make up the majority of what people eat. The Administration’s focus on whole foods is an opportunity to increase fruit and vegetable intake, as they are the most nutrient-dense foods available.”

Rollins Teases Plan to Expand Real Food Retail Accessibility

There was more than the new dietary guidelines announced at the press event. Rollins mentioned upcoming changes at retail she says would increase the accessibility of whole, healthy foods to those in food deserts.

“Soon, USDA will finalize our stocking standards,” she says, explaining retailers that take SNAP benefits are bound by the stocking standards. “Very soon we will be finalizing that rule that will mandate all 250,000 retailers in America to double the type of staple foods they provide for America’s SNAP households. This means healthier options will be in reach for all American families, regardless of circumstance, at levels never seen before in our country.”

Grains and Oilseed Industry Focuses on Positives

In terms of grains, in its guidance USDA recommends Americans “focus on whole grains, while sharply reducing refined carbohydrates.” The National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) shared mixed reactions to the changes.

“We appreciate the continued recognition of whole grains as an essential part of Americans’ diets,” said a spokesperson with NAWG in a statement to Farm Journal. “However, we are concerned that some portions of the new guidelines around grains and wheat are unintentionally confusing. Wheat, wheat flour, and foods made from wheat have been nutrient-rich, life-sustaining staples for tens of thousands of years and deserve clear, continued support as a central part of our nation’s diet.”

The American Soybean Association (ASA) focuses on the positives saying it highlights the importance of increased protein consumption, including plant-based proteins, such as soy-based foods. They also emphasize prioritizing healthy fats, including oils rich in essential fatty acids like soybean oil.

ASA says an addendum continues to call into question the process of soybean oil extraction, which it says is scientifically proven to be safe for human health.

“Soybean oil and soy protein play a critical role in the health and nutrition of Americans,” says Scott Metzger, ASA president and Ohio farmer, in a press release. “We remain deeply concerned by the rhetoric and selectively cited studies regarding the health and safety of soybean oil in DGA supporting material.”

Metzger says soybean growers will continue to work with the administration and educate MAHA commission leadership on the health benefits of soy-based foods and soybean oil.

The National Oilseed Processors Association (NOPA) echoed those concern: “Vegetable oils, or “seed oils” as they’re sometimes referred to, are a significant provider of essential fatty acids and remain a safe and cost-effective source of dietary fats in the American diet, as they are globally,” said a NOPA press release. “However, some appendices rely on a narrow evidence base with limited citations, which is concerning given the administration’s rhetoric questioning the safety of certain vegetable oils despite an established scientific consensus.”

NOPA also argues oilseeds support the production of affordable meat, dairy and eggs as meal produced from oilseeds are a key component of livestock diets.

Did the Administration's Plan to Lower Beef Prices Wreck the Bull Run in the Cattle Market?

Fri, 14 Nov 2025 20:02:31 GMT

2025 has been a historic year in the cattle market. The tightest cattle numbers in 70 years laid the ground work for cash and futures prices to push to record and all-time highs.

From All-Time High to Crash
The peak in the cattle futures market was hit on Oct. 16. However, by Nov. 6, live cattle saw a $30 correction from the highs and feeder cattle futures set back nearly $70. The cattle market chaos wasn’t tied to fundamentals but liquidation by speculative traders on fear of policy changes by the administration as President Donald Trump announced a plan to lower beef prices for consumers.

Fundamentals Have Not Changed
Don Close, senior animal protein analyst with Terrain, says the market fundamentals that started the bull run in the cattle market are still intact.

“Certainly with domestic supplies, they have not changed in any fashion when you’re looking at the tightest cattle numbers that we’ve had in 70 years,” he says.

With high retail beef prices, there is no evidence of consumer sticker shock or trading down to other lower-priced proteins. Close says the beef industry has not seen any erosion in demand.

So, what changed? Analysts say it was the shift in market psychology in reaction to President Trump’s announced plan to lower beef prices for consumers on Oct. 16.

While the President’s announcement lacked details, the goal seemed to be to mimic the success the administration had in bringing down egg prices. With the prospect of government intervention, the live and feeder cattle futures touched limit down the following day as speculative traders who had been long in the cattle futures market for many weeks took profits and liquidated.

Jeff Hoogendoorn, with Professional Ag Marketing, says the managed money fund traders did not want to bet against the government.

“If you’re a hedge fund manager, you look at this cattle thing and say ‘Yeah it’s gone up an awful lot. We’ve made a lot of money,’” he says. “‘Now the administration’s going to be fighting against me. I think I’ll go find something else to do’, and you move your money elsewhere.”

Trump Administration Quadruples Argentina Beef Imports
Just days later, President Trump made an announcement to quadruple the Tariff Rate Quota for Argentina beef imports . That triggered additional selling in cattle futures despite the insignificant impact it has on U.S. beef supplies.

Patrick Linnell, director of market research with CattleFax, explains: “That change from 20,000 metric tons to 80,000 metric tons would represent around 132 million lb. And really, that comes down to about three-tenths of a lb. per capita to net beef supplies.”

(Allendale )

The move drew immediate fire from the nation’s cattle groups, including the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA).

Colin Woodall, NCBA chief executive officer, explains that with the current trade imbalance with Argentina, the administration needed to push for more market access in Argentina instead of importing more of its beef.

“Over the past five years, Argentina has sent over $800 million worth of their beef into the U.S. market, and they’ve only accepted $7 million of our beef into their market,” Woodall explains.

Justin Tupper president of the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association, adds that increasing beef imports was a slap in the face to U.S. cattle producers, and they opposed the move because countries like Brazil and Argentina have lower food safety standards and other practices that put the U.S. at a disadvantage.

“I think we want to be able to play on the same level playing field,” he says. “And I don’t think that happens with Argentina and Brazil. And again, I really don’t think it’s going to lower prices.”

Tupper adds neither producers or consumers stood to gain from increasing beef imports.

For more about Tupper’s thoughts:
South Dakota Producer Speaks Out About Beef Imports and “Product of USA” Push

Cattle Groups Tell Trump to Stay out of the Cattle Business
As a result, cattle groups and outraged producers warned the president to stay out of their business.

Woodall says: “We have worked really hard through the free market to be able to achieve the prices that we’re seeing. We don’t want government intervention coming in and messing with that and taking away these great opportunities we’re seeing.”

Tupper agrees: “It’s an industry that wants to work on competition and merit based, and we can do that if we make sure we don’t get to many outside interests — the government being one.”

Government Policy Pushes Prices Higher
However, two government policies pushed live cattle from $210 to $250 from July through September.

1. Increased Tariffs on Brazil. The U.S. increased tariffs on Brazil an additional 50% in mid-August, which nearly halted imports of beef trim coming into the U.S. Linnell explains, prior to that time, Brazil was a top importer of trim used to blend in ground beef.

“As of July on a 12-month basis, we’d imported just shy of 1.1 billion lb. from Brazil,” he says.

2. Closing the Mexican Border. The biggest policy change that tightened cattle numbers came from the U.S. closing the border to feeder cattle imports . Linnell says prior to closure, the U.S. imported more than 1.2 million feeder cattle annually. So, dropping the ban would have an immediate supply shock.

“We won’t see all 1.2 million head coming across at once but approaching that 25,000 head a week isn’t out of the question,” he adds.

(CattleFax )

While USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins has confirmed there’s no date for resuming trade, speculative traders are headline driven. Every time USDA hosts a news conference on New World screwworm, it tanks the market — especially feeder cattle futures.

The market has also been sensitive to rumors of the border reopening, says Scott Varilek, of Kooima Kooima Varilek.

“There’s this large supply in Mexico. That would be the one thing that would probably affect this market the most,” Varilek says. “So, we’re penciling that in.”

Trump Calls for DOJ Investigation
The latest attempt to curb beef inflation came Nov. 7, as the president announced on his Truth Social site the Department of Justice was launching an investigation of the nation’s meat packers .

The president’s announcement says he vows to “ensure these corporations aren’t criminally profiting at the expense of the American people.”

Packer concentration has long been a hot button issue for cattle producers and is at the root of R-CALF’s six-year lawsuit, explains Bill Bullard, chief executive officer.

“We have alleged that the meat packers had unlawfully colluded in order to artificially depress cattle prices, while at the same time raising or inflating the price of beef to the consumers,” he says.

Currently 85% of the U.S. beef packing industry is owned by four entities, and Bullard says this monopoly violates antitrust law.

“Both the producers on the beginning of the supply chain and consumers at the end of the supply chain were exploited as a result of this monopolistic marketing structure,” he says.

Read more about Bullard’s thoughts regarding the DOJ investigation: Is the Beef Market Broken? One Cattleman Says Yes

But according to Derrell Peel, livestock marketing specialist at Oklahoma State University, past DOJ price fixing probes and research have disputed that.

“While there’s a very small level of negative price impact due to the concentration of market power, if you will, it’s far outweighed by the by the benefits in terms of cost efficiencies that the large firms bring to the industry,” he summarizes.

Read more about Peel’s comments regarding the industry chaos today: Beef Industry Chaos: Tight Supplies, Strong Consumer Demand and Political Interference

Cattle Producers Say Trump’s Beef Plan Topped the Market
Some of the other aspects of the President’s plan to rebuild the cattle herd were met with favor, such as opening more public land to grazing. However, in the end, the president’s beef plan has wreaked havoc in the cattle market and outraged producers, according to Varilek.

“They’re mad,” he summarizes. “That’s all it took was just kind of the government shoving in there and wrecking [the] market. I think the biggest thing was that there were some claims that the tariffs were the reason that we got this high, and that is not at all the case.”

Linnell agrees the negative headlines have hurt the market, adding: “There is no doubt that these policy decisions are making a big impact on the marketplace. They also just increase a lot of uncertainty and volatility in the industry.”

Cattle Market Chaos Further Slows Herd Rebuilding
The loss in value of females just over the last three weeks has also hurt producer confidence, and according to Close, that could further slow heifer retention and herd rebuilding efforts .

“We’re seeing one more round where we’re going to kick that can down the road instead of actually retaining the females needed,” he explains.

Market analysts, including Peel, say the reality is lowering beef prices is like turning the Titanic — and the president’s plan is unlikely to affect much change.

“It took several years of of drought and other impacts to get us here,” Peel explains. “It’s going to take several years for us to grow our way out of this situation.”

Close says once the market refocuses on fundamentals, cattle could retest the highs.

“As crazy as it sounds today, I’m not yet convinced we’ve seen the high of the cash market, and I would readily argue that we get into next spring, next summer to see a cash market back in that $240 to $245 plus level. I think is entirely possible,” he predicts.

Cattle Signal Bottom as DOJ Packer Probe Launched: Grains Eye Govt Reopening

Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:10:12 GMT

Cattle futures are mostly higher early Monday morning as well as the grain complex, hogs are mostly lower.

Cattle Show Signs of Bottoming?
Live and feeder cattle futures are extending gains after a higher close on Friday. Brad Kooima, Kooima Kooima Varilek, says he is encouraged a low may be forming in both markets. The reason is the support areas that held on the charts last week. While the bears point to another week of lower closes, he says the breakout point in July when both markets took another leg higher is holding technically.

“If you look at February live cattle the low last week was $215.02 and the breakout point on the July 4th weekend was around $215 which is promising and for January feeder cattle the low was $311.40 last week which also coincides with the breakout point of $310.” he explains.

Cash Market Showing Bullish Signs
The fed cash market is also showing some bullish signs according to Kooima with cattle trading on Friday at $225 in the North and those cattle being shipped to other packing plants outside of the region. Dressed prices in the North were mostly $360, up $2 from the weighted average in Nebraska the previous week. Meanwhile, the South traded mostly $232, down $3 to $4.

DOJ Investigation Launched
The rally comes on the heels of and maybe even in reaction to President Trump and the Department of Justice announcing on Friday they were launching an investigation possible price fixing by the nation’s meat packers. This is part of the President’s plan to lower beef prices at the store for consumers.

However, Kooima says he’s skeptical of the investigation uncovering collusion because of the past history of those investigations. He points to the probe launched after the Holcomb fire in Kansas and the disconnect between record boxed beef prices and record low cattle prices during the height of COVID. “Those studies never uncovered anything abnormal to prosecute the packers on even though Three Blind Mice could have detected price fixing in those circumstances. I am all for the producers but I am not very hopeful this time around,” he says.

Kooima says if the big four packers that control 80% of the beef packing industry were broken up it could have positive long term implications for the market but short term the disruption could be a nightmare. Still he says if the investigation leads to improved price transparency he’s all for it.

Lean Hogs Struggle
Lean hog futures are mostly lower except for the December contract which has to align with the Lean Hog Index which is currently at $89.73. However, Kooima says the back months are making new lows for the move and technically the charts are beat up. Additionally, he says the slaughter numbers have rebounded with less disease problems. “You just don’t have good enough demand for the increase in supply we are currently seeing. When the only good thing you can say about the futures is they are oversold, you’re in trouble,” he points out.

Grains Mostly Higher on Hopes for Government Reopening
Grains are mostly higher Monday morning on hopes the government will soon be reopened after news reports Sunday night the Senate had enough votes to move the Continuing Resolution. The key will be if the House can do the same.

However, Kooima says that is holding up the grain markets with ideas we may soon get some bullish USDA data to help support the futures. That would include lower yields in the upcoming USDA crop production report and flash sales showing China purchases. Corn was trading two-sided as the December contract was running up into chart resistance he adds.

As Markets Search for Clarity, USDA Says NASS Will Issue Key Reports in November Despite Government Shutdown

Fri, 31 Oct 2025 16:30:12 GMT

The federal government’s continued shutdown is no longer just a Washington standoff — it’s becoming a real-world problem for farmers and ranchers. As the days drag on without resolution, three Kansas State University economists warn that even with FSA offices back open, the absence of key USDA reports is rippling through every corner of the ag economy, from commodity markets to cattle prices and farm-level business planning.

But on Friday, USDA-NASS issued a bit of surprise. The agency says NASS will release key data in November for the following reports , some with a delay:

Milk Production – Nov. 10 (previously scheduled for Oct. 22)
Crop Production – Nov. 14 (previously scheduled for Nov. 10)
Cattle on Feed – Nov. 21 (as previously scheduled)
Milk Production – Nov. 21 (as previously scheduled)
The World Agricultural Outlook Board will release the World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE) in conjunction with the Crop Production report on Nov. 14.

With much of the agency still furloughed, there are questions regarding how NASS will have enough staff to provide those key reports. The release didn’t offer any additional details, only saying those key reports will be released in November.

However, there are a few key reports still missing, which includes daily flash sales reports and weekly export sales information.

A Data Blackout Hits the Heart of Agriculture

Until now, the shutdown has silenced the regular flow of government data that producers, analysts and traders depend on — reports like the weekly export sales, crop progress and Cattle on Feed updates, as well as the highly anticipated World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates (WASDE).

“The fact that the government is still shut down means we aren’t getting those weekly export sales reports,” says Allen Featherstone, head of the department of agricultural economics at Kansas State University. “That’s a real problem because we rely on that information to confirm what’s actually happening in the market.”

Is China Actually Buying? The Absence of Flash Sales Reports Creates Confusion

With the U.S. and China negotiating renewed agricultural trade commitments , there are fresh promises of more purchases in the weeks and months ahead. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Thursday that China has agreed to buy 12 million metric tons of American soybeans during the current season through January and has committed to buying 25 million tons annually for the next three years as part of a larger trade agreement with Beijing.

Featherstone notes that while China claims it is buying U.S. soybeans, the lack of USDA verification makes it difficult to gauge the truth and confirm those buys are happening. And in USDA’s announcement Friday, there was no indication the flash sales and weekly export sales will resume.

“Earlier this week, China reportedly purchased three vessels, about 180,000 metric tons, but not having official data from USDA is a major issue,” he says. “Tracking purchases becomes challenging when the normal reporting mechanisms are down.”

Despite some optimism around U.S.-China trade progress, Featherstone says markets are hesitant to believe much until concrete export numbers appear.

“If China doesn’t come through, that will lead to more negativity in prices given the size of this year’s crop,” he says. “China imports roughly 60% of the world’s soybeans, and if they don’t buy from us, that’s a big problem.”

Featherstone emphasizes the importance of diversifying U.S. export markets.

“We need to broaden who’s buying our products,” he says. “Relying too heavily on one trade partner makes us vulnerable, and this shutdown is a reminder of just how fragile that system can be when government data and diplomacy both stall.”

No November WASDE?

While some private companies attempt to replicate USDA’s data models, those efforts often fall short, according to Terry Griffin, K-State’s precision agriculture economist.

“We’re not likely to have a November WASDE because all the footwork that leads up to it hasn’t happened,” Griffin explains. “Even if the shutdown ends this weekend, that report won’t be ready. There’s just too much groundwork that hasn’t been done.”

He says the lack of USDA reports has forced brokers, trading firms and agribusinesses to depend on private estimates that vary widely.

“They’ve become so reliant on USDA’s National Ag Statistics Service that they’re struggling right now to do their business,” Griffin says. “It’s throwing off everything from national models to local crop forecasts.”

Griffin also points out the shutdown’s impact reaches beyond the boardroom and into academia.

“We have a graduate student working on a peanut production forecasting model, and she’s using crop progress data that come out every week,” he explains. “Without those reports, she can’t validate her model. The data blackout affects research, innovation and business planning all at once.”

Cattle Producers Face Growing Uncertainty

The shutdown’s effects extend deeply into the livestock sector, where missing data is already creating confusion and volatility. Glynn Tonsor, K-State livestock economist, says the absence of reports like Cattle on Feed and slaughter estimates makes it difficult to assess market fundamentals.

“The Cattle on Feed Report is something we normally get monthly. Historically, it has a steer and heifer breakdown, which would be quite useful at the moment as the most recent insight about whether we’re expanding the herd or not, and we’re not going to have that detail,” says Tonsor. “There’s also been a lot of discussion about beef prices and some accusations or desires to make those lower, and we’re actually already behind on what the beef price is in this country. So there’s lots of examples that we could give you that are not just livestock and not just crops. And the longer the shutdown goes, the longer those data gaps exist and build, the harder it is for anybody, whether it’s an academic like us up here or private sector or individual producers, to adjust.”

He notes while we did see life in the cattle market this week, if you look at what happened since President Trump made comments about cattle prices being too high , the cattle market has pulled back significantly in recent weeks.

“Roughly $200 per head has come off the value of cattle in just 10 days,” Tonsor says. “If you’re a cow-calf producer, you’re still positioned for 2025 to be a good year, but uncertainty is the biggest risk right now. Anything that elevates uncertainty delays long-term investments, whether that’s expanding the herd or making capital improvements.”

That uncertainty isn’t only about market data. Tonsor says the political noise out of Washington, including renewed calls for mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (MCOOL), adds to the confusion.

“Taste remains the main driver of beef demand,” he says. “Origin and traceability rank much lower for the average consumer. There are niche opportunities, but for most people, it’s not what decides their protein purchases.”

A Cloud of Uncertainty Over Rural America

For now, K-State’s economists agree on one thing: The shutdown’s ripple effects are growing with every passing day. From grain markets to livestock pricing, from academic research to on-farm decision-making, the absence of reliable government data leaves agriculture flying blind.

“The longer the shutdown goes, the more those data gaps build,” Tonsor says. “And the harder it becomes for anyone, whether you’re an academic, a trader or a producer, to adjust.”

Political Blame Game in Washington

The political blame game continues in Washington, and it’s creating a stalemate. The Democrats are blaming the GOP, and the GOP is blaming the Democrats, both claiming the other party doesn’t care about every day Americans, otherwise the other side would make concessions to reopen the government.

House Committee on Agriculture Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson, R-Pa., released a statement on Friday, the day before SNAP benefits are set to expire, saying the prolonged government shutdown is caused by Democrats in the U.S. Senate.

“Because Senate Democrats insist on keeping the federal government shut down, more than 40 million Americans — including children, seniors, veterans and military families — will not receive their November SNAP benefits beginning this weekend. The No. 2 House Democrat acknowledged that suffering families are their ‘leverage’, confirming that this is a political choice.”

U.S. Representative Angie Craig, D-Minn., and Ranking Member of the House Ag Committee, says the onus falls on President Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans.

“Secretary Rollins said one honest thing today: The government is failing the American people. Republicans control the House, Senate and White House. The Trump administration has the legal authority and funds necessary to get November SNAP benefits out the door. They are illegally withholding food from 42 million Americans, and it is shameful,” said Craig in a statement on Friday.

USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden says the fallout extends well beyond the Capitol. From families losing access to food assistance to disruptions in beef and soybean markets, Vaden warns that the consequences are real and immediate.

In an interview on “AgriTalk,” Vaden accuses congressional Democrats of blocking a “clean continuing resolution” and says the resulting gridlock could harm both consumers and producers.

“If they don’t vote to reopen the government, then 40-plus million SNAP recipients see no extra money added to their benefit cards this weekend,” Vaden says. “We shouldn’t be playing politics with people’s lives and people’s dinner tables.”

SNAP and WIC Funding Hang in the Balance

Vaden says USDA manages to keep the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program funded for now by reallocating money from other programs. But the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which costs about $9 billion each month, has no such cushion.

“When it comes to SNAP, we’re talking about more than 9 billion — with a B — dollars,” he explains. “We don’t have that kind of money lying around here at USDA. The contingency fund people talk about is nowhere close to that amount, and it’s meant for natural disasters. We surely don’t want to be spending that and then hoping there’s no hurricane while Congress continues this shutdown.”

Without congressional action, Vaden says 40 million Americans might not receive their grocery benefits at the start of November — a moment when both food demand and household strain typically rise ahead of the holidays.

“That’s 9 billion dollars of groceries,” Vaden emphasizes. “And those groceries include beef, pork and poultry. These are markets that are sensitive to even a 1% shift in demand.”

“A Lump of Coal” for the Holidays

As the shutdown looms, Vaden says the timing is especially painful.

“We’re heading into the holiday season; it’s supposed to be a time of good cheer,” he says. “Unfortunately, Senator Schumer and Representative Jeffries are giving everybody a lump of coal. This needs to stop. We shouldn’t be playing games with people’s lives.”

He adds that USDA can move quickly once Congress passes appropriations.

“You want people to receive their SNAP benefits? It’s real simple,” Vaden says. “Give us our normal appropriations, and USDA will do what it does so well: get those benefits onto people’s cards quickly and efficiently.”

Beef Producers React to USDA's Plan to Fortify Industry and Trump's Social Media Comments

Wed, 22 Oct 2025 21:22:53 GMT

In an effort to strengthen the American beef industry and reinforce and prioritize the rancher’s critical role in national security, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and other cabinet members announced a suite of actions on Wednesday.

Since 2017, the U.S. has lost over 17% of family farms — more than 100,000 operations over the last decade. The national herd is at a 75-year low while consumer demand for beef has grown 9% over the past decade. Because increasing the size of the domestic herd takes time, USDA says it is investing now to make these markets less volatile for ranchers over the long term and more affordable for consumers.

“America’s food supply chain is a national security priority for the Trump Administration. We are committed to ensuring the American people have an affordable source of protein and that America’s ranchers have a strong economic environment where they can continue to operate for generations to come,” Rollins says in a press release . “At USDA we are protecting our beef industry and incentivizing new ranchers to take up the noble vocation of ranching. Today, USDA will immediately expedite deregulatory reforms, boost processing capacity, including getting more locally raised beef into schools, and working across the government to fix longstanding common-sense barriers for ranchers like outdated grazing restrictions.”

The plan includes three coordinated priorities:

Protecting and improving the business of ranching
- Strengthening the foundation of U.S. cattle production through endangered species reforms, enhanced disaster relief, increased grazing access (approximately 5 million acres), increased access to capital, and affordable risk management tools.
Expanding processing, consumer transparency and market access.
- Lowering long-term costs by cutting inspection costs by up to 75% for small processors, increasing marketing options for consumers with Product of USA labeling and ensuring consumers have clear, truthful information about American beef.
Building demand alongside domestic supply
- Growing the domestic herd while boosting domestic and international demand so that ranchers are not trapped in the boom/bust cycle that has defined past cattle markets. This strategy includes boosting long-term demand to reduce prices for consumers while growing markets for ranchers through significant farm-to-school grans and protein-focused dietary guidelines.

The plan is available through the USDA website.

Trump Takes to Social on Beef

President Donald Trump shared his perspective on beef industry success on X.

“The Cattle Ranchers, who I love, don’t understand that the only reason they are doing so well, for the first time in decades, is because I put Tariffs on cattle coming into the United States, including a 50% tariff on Brazil,” Trump posted.

Following the post, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) made a post on Facebook in response and also released a statement on the president’s steps to undercut U.S. cattle producers:

“In a misguided effort to lower the price of beef in grocery stores, President Trump said he plans to increase the volume of beef being imported from Argentina. Efforts to manipulate markets only risk damaging the livelihoods of American cattlemen and women, while doing little to impact the price consumers are paying at the grocery store.”

“The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and its members cannot stand behind the President while he undercuts the future of family farmers and ranchers by importing Argentinian beef in an attempt to influence prices,” said NCBA CEO Colin Woodall. “It is imperative that President Trump and Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins let the cattle markets work.”

”The U.S. already faces a deep trade imbalance with Argentina, one that is made worse by the President’s plan. During the past five years, Argentina has shipped beef valued at more than $800 million to the U.S., while purchasing only $7 million of U.S. beef. Furthermore, Argentina is a nation with a long history of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), and USDA has not completed the necessary steps to ensure Argentina can guarantee the safety of the products being shipped here, further endangering America’s cattle herd.

“If President Trump is truly an ally of America’s cattle producers, we call on him to abandon this effort to manipulate markets and focus instead on the promised New World Screwworm facilities in Texas; making additional investments that protect the domestic cattle herd from foreign animal diseases such as FMD; and addressing regulatory burdens, such as delisting of the gray wolf and addressing the scourge of black vultures,” Woodall said, concluding the statement.

Your Next Read: Is Argentina Beef the Answer to Lowering Beef Prices?

Can the Cattle Market Hold? Grains Pin Hopes on China Deal

Mon, 06 Oct 2025 14:58:41 GMT

Livestock and grain futures are mixed early Monday.

Can Cattle Hold?

Cattle futures started mostly higher Monday after holding slightly higher weekly closes in all but October live cattle last week.

Brad Kooima, Kooima Kooima Varilek, says the market is staying intact and absorbing a great deal of bearish news including last week’s lower fed cash trade and lower cutouts.

The funds are still long in the market but if December live cattle take out $232 on the charts that will trigger some liquidation and if $230 is breached that could turn the trend lower which could cause mass technical selling.

Cash is King

He says cash trade on feeder cattle at the auction barns has continued to be strong which is bullish.

However, fed cash trade last week was once again lower in the North at $228 to mostly $230 live and the North has lost its premium to the South, which Kooima says is bearish. The South also traded $233, down $3 last week.

Yet, he is still optimistic about cash trading steady in both areas this week.

Boxed Beef Still Leaking

That’s despite boxed beef values seeing pressure again last week with the Choice cutouts down $9.16 and closing in on $60 off the highs a few weeks ago.

Kooima says seasonally the beef market could continue to see some pressure.

NWS Rumors Continue to Circulate

Kooima says the market is also nervous about the timing of the opening of the border to Mexican feeder cattle imports.

“There seems to be a new rumor circulating every week,” he says, which is also keeping speculators cautious.

Cargill Plant Dark

Meanwhile, the Cargill plant in Ft. Morgan, Colorado is dark today and for the next 10 days due to routine maintenance.

Kooima says the market knew about that two weeks ago and it shouldn’t have an impact on the market as they are going to slaughter cattle at other facilities.

Lean Hog Futures See Technical Damage

Lean hog futures had a lower weekly close last week and have done significant chart damage and so Kooima thinks there could be more fund liquidation ahead.

Cash and cutout values were also down last week.

Grains Quiet, But Holding on China Hopes

Grains were quietly mixed early Monday but Kooima says funds piled back into the market last week after President Trump’s social media post indicating a deal was near.

He says that may just be enough to keep the traders in the grain market for the immediate future.