North Dakota's plan to boost animal agriculture has reignited a thorny issue: loosening restrictions on corporate ownership of farms. The state said it's about competition, but there are renewed concerns about environmental setbacks, as well as tribal considerations.

A bill in the Legislature would bring some big changes to a decades-old law prohibiting corporations from owning North Dakota farmland. Exemptions would essentially be applied to cattle, hog and poultry feedlots and dairies.

Scott Skokos, executive director of the Dakota Resource Council, worries the state does not have the regulatory capacity to monitor a potential influx of factory farms.

"I don't necessarily think that we have robust enough rules for us to really welcome an industry that will come in [here] in large scale, most likely," Skokos pointed out.

He contended if regulations lag behind development, waterways would become polluted and air quality would suffer. Tribal advocates worry about dumping of waste near reservations, pointing to examples from the fossil-fuel industry.

The state's agriculture commissioner told a House committee it is about having companies partnering with local farms, while noting there would still be restrictions.

The bill includes a limit of 160 acres in setting a business structure for corporate ownership.

Nicole Donaghy, executive director of North Dakota Native Vote, said such a property can still hold a lot of animals and is not sustainable. She also argued corporations would be able to work around the limitations.

"All it takes is creating another subsidiary in order to obtain another 160 acres," Donaghy asserted.

Her group's research showed it means up to 2,600 farms could be used to gain a competitive advantage.

Meanwhile, state leaders have testified extra manure from the operations could improve soil health. Skokos acknowledged while it is true, the risks are far greater.

"The volume that we're looking at if we get to the scale that people want to get to in North Dakota would be very damaging," Skokos emphasized.

Leaders in Bismarck have argued the state needs to complement its grain production by making significant gains in livestock, noting North Dakota is falling behind neighboring states. The bill is expected to see more debate in the coming weeks.

New York's State Legislature is considering a bill to ensure that companies contracting with the state don't contribute to tropical deforestation.

The Tropical Deforestation-Free Procurement Act holds companies contracting with New York State accountable for any deforestation they might take part in, whether that's through how their product is made or through their supply chain.

A study from the University of Cambridge finds 94 companies have adopted zero-deforestation commitments, although most are not put into practice.

Marcus Sibley - director of conservation partnerships for New York, New Jersey and Connecticut for the National Wildlife Federation - said New York has worked hard to fight climate change, and this bill is a new weapon in that fight.

"We're saying now, we've already taken one major step," said Sibley. "The next major step is to pay attention to how our actions are impacting abroad as well as domestically."

A previous version of this bill was introduced, but faced opposition to language referring to boreal forests.

The bill also creates the supply-chain transparency assistance program to aid small and medium-sized businesses as well as minority- and women-owned businesses to utilize compliant supply chains.

The bill is under review by the Procurement and Contracts Committee.

One of the long-term effects this bill's passage could have is reducing the superstorms afflicting New York. In recent years, storms have gathered power, causing billions of dollars in damage.

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the 60 major weather events between 2020 and 2022 cost more than $430 Billion.

Sibley said despite steps being taken to combat climate change, New York is still in harm's way.

"New Yorkers are still in harm's way of daily heat waves, life-threatening storms and severe economic climate impacts," said Sibley. "This is why the impacts of climate change, they don't respect our artificial state and national boundaries."

Outside of this bill, Sibley noted that New Yorkers can take their own steps to take a stand against tropical deforestation by checking where certain products come from. This is becoming a more important issue as 72% of shoppers say transparency is important to them with in-store and online shopping, according to a report from the Food Industry Association and Nielsen I-Q.

Racial disparities exist in Minnesota when it comes to asthma cases. Environmental-justice advocates said it is one example of pollution disproportionately affecting communities of color, and they hope a bill in the Legislature would add protections.

The plan calls on the Pollution Control Agency to consider whether an industrial site or other entity seeking a permit would add to the cumulative impact in a racially diverse area that already has environmental stressors.

Carolina Ortiz, associate executive director of the Latino advocacy group COPAL MN, said the timing is especially important as Minnesota sees more climate migration from other countries.

"They're running away from some of the pollution, some of the additional barriers they face over there," Ortiz observed. "But then they're coming here to face the same thing, just in a different location."

Criteria for the environmental justice areas would include certain percentages of people who are nonwhite, who speak limited English, as well as income levels and tribal lands. The measure has been heard by various committees and is expected to be included in a larger omnibus bill. The League of Minnesota Cities recognizes the need but worries about how municipal water facilities would need periodic reviews of permits.

Tim Schaefer, legal advocate for COPAL MN, said it should not be viewed as an obstacle toward economic growth, because it can help create stronger and healthier communities.

"If economic growth comes at the expense of human health, if it comes at the expense of people's families and people's safety and security and their well-being, it's not worth it," Schaefer argued.

Roxxanne O'Brien, founder of Community Members for Environmental Justice in North Minneapolis, said neighborhoods in her area often lack the power to limit the development of industry and traffic and the pollution that comes along with it.

"We're not the ones heavily adding the carbon footprint out here, but we are the ones who get exploited the most," O'Brien contended.

Environmental activists are calling on Gov. Maura Healy to end construction of the Eversource electrical substation in East Boston, and move it to Massport - which will utilize most of the generated power.

The activists say the utility is knowingly building the high-voltage project in a flood plain, posing health and safety risks to the surrounding community.

State Sen. Lydia Edwards - D-Boston - said local residents should not pay for energy meant to power Logan Airport.

"This is all about them," said Edwards. "It has never been about our community. It has never been about what we need or want."

Edwards said the project runs counter to the Commonwealth's landmark climate law - which requires environmental justice factors be considered when siting infrastructure projects, and residents say they are already overburdened with industrial pollution.

Eversource says the substation is needed to meet the area's growing energy demands.

Healy has previously expressed her opposition to the substation and members of her cabinet have committed to reviewing all legal procedures related to its construction.

But activists such as Alex Chambers - an organizer with the climate justice group Extinction Rebellion - said nearly 84% of voters already rejected the project in a 2021 ballot initiative.

"It's a real insult that the state government has allowed this to go forward," said Chambers. "We should be creating more green space for people to use, not allocating it to investor-owned utilities like Eversource."

Chambers said activists will continue to practice civil disobedience at the construction site while appealing to Healy to intervene.

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu has already publicly opposed the project.




get more stories like this via email