HomeMy WebLinkAbout03_YB_Appx 03-G_Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan 2015Tompkins County
Agriculture and
Farmland
Protection Plan
June 2015
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
This page intentionally left blank
2
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Acknowledgements
The Tompkins County Agricultural and Farmland Protection Plan was funded by a
planning grant from the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets with additional
support from the Tompkins County Planning Department and Cornell Cooperative Extension of
Tompkins County.
Tompkins County Legislature
Michael Lane, Chair Dooley Kiefer Martha Robertson
Will Burbank Daniel Klein Nathan Shinagawa
Carol Chock Leslyn McBean-Clairborne Mike Sigler
James Dennis David McKenna Peter Stein
Kathy Luz Herrera Glenn Morey
Joe Mareane, County Administrator
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board
Edward Scheffler, Chair Scheffler Farm
Robert Mazourek, Vice Chair Mazourek Farms
Daniel Carey Carey Farm, Tompkins County Soil and Water District
Chair
N. Lin Davidson Davidson Farm
Scott Doyle Tompkins County Planning
Irene Kehoe Tompkins County Assessment
Dave McKenna Tompkins County Legislature
Monika Roth Cornell Cooperative Extension of Tompkins
County
Donald Specker Finger Lakes Land Trust
Debbie Teeter Staff
Thank you to the many farmers who participated in focus groups, interviews and
meetings.
3
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Part I Introduction 6
A. Executive Summary 6
B. Priority Initiatives & Actions 7
C. Implementation Recommendations 9
D. Background 10
E. The Need for a New Plan 10
F. The Process for Updating the Plan 11
Part II Status of Agriculture in Tompkins County 12
A. Significance of Agriculture in Tompkins County 12
B. Agricultural Trends 14
1. Historic Trends 14
2. Number of Farms 14
3. Land in Farms 14
4. Average Acreage per Farm 14
5. Cropland Acreage 15
6. Farms by Type & Market Value 15
7. Agricultural Sales 16
8. Regional Variation 16
9. Current Composition of Tompkins County Farms 17
10. Farms by Sales Class 17
11. Demographics of Farming Population 19
12. Farm Typology 19
13. Farming as Primary Occupation 20
14. Age of Farmers 20
15. Farm Tenure 21
16. Gender of Operators 22
17. Trends Summary 22
C. Environmental Assessment 24
1. Tompkins County Agriculture & the Environment 24
2. Natural Resources 24
3. Water Resources 24
4. Soil Resources 25
5. Climate Impacts of Tompkins County Farmland 26
6. Invasive and Pest Species 27
7. Sustainable Farming Practices 28
D. Agriculture Sectors Overview 30
E. Agriculture Sector Profiles: Trends & Challenges 30
1. Dairy 35
2. Field Crops 38
3. Large Animal Livestock 41
4. Small Animal Livestock 43
5. Equine 45
6. Market Growers 47
7. Ornamental Horticulture 50
F. Implications for the Future of Agriculture 52
4
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Part III Land Use Development and Policies 53
A. Land use development 53
1. Development patterns: implications for agriculture 53
2. Farmland Demand: implications on sectors & farm size 53
B. Local Policies 53
1. County Wide Planning Efforts 53
2. Regional Sustainability Plan 54
3. Tompkins County Economic Development Plan 55
4. Town-Level Land Use Planning 55
C. State Policies 57
1. Agricultural Districts 57
2. Farmland Protection 59
Part IV Priority Goals, Actions, and Strategies 60
A. Priorities 60
1. Location of Areas Proposed for Protection 60
2. Value to the Agricultural Economy of the County 60
3. Open Space Value 61
4. Consequences of Possible Conversion 61
5. Level of Conversion Pressure 61
B. Goals, Strategies and Action Steps 62
1. Agricultural Economic Development 62
2. Local Foods 63
3. Land Use Policy and Regulations 64
4. Agriculture Awareness 65
5. Environmental Quality 66
6. Future Farmers/Workforce 67
C. Timeline for implementation and assignments 68
D. Evaluation Process 68
Part V Maps
A. Tompkins County Land Cover
B. Tompkins County Agricultural Assessed Land: Owned and Leased
C. Tompkins County Agricultural Districts
D. Tompkins County Agricultural Conservation Easements and Agricultural Resource
Focus Areas
E. Tompkins County Land Use and Land Cover 2012
F. Tompkins County Agricultural Soils and Priority Protection Areas
G. Tompkins County High Priority Farmland Protection Areas
Part VI Appendices
A. Agriculture Economic Development Initiatives
B. 1998 Agriculture & Farmland Protection Plan Actions & Accomplishments
C. Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan Meeting Notes
D. 2013 Agriculture Sector Focus Group Notes & November 2013 Farmer Meeting
Notes
E. 2014 Ag Summit Notes
F. May 2015 Farmer & Agricultural Land Owner Meetings Notes
G. Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board Purchase of Development Rights Criteria
H. ClimAid report Information
5
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Part I. Introduction
A. Executive Summary
The Need for a New Plan
In 1998, Tompkins County adopted what was one of the first New York State county-wide
Agricultural and Farmland Protection Plans. Over the next 15 years, the Plan provided direction for the
County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board, and in conjunction with Cornell Cooperative
Extension, many of the plans goals were met and exceeded.
New and emerging agricultural trends and issues have arisen since the original plan was
written. In general, some farms have gotten larger; competition for farmland has resulted in a >100%
increase in agricultural land assessment, and smaller farms are beginning to report they are having a
hard time accessing land they need to start or expand. While there are fewer dairy farms than there
were 15 years ago, those remaining are larger – and continue to grow. Increasing interest in locally
grown and produced foods, support for which was a goal of the 1998 Plan, has fostered many smaller
scale operations that grow produce, make cheese, and raise livestock for local customers.
As residential development moves into rural areas, and the general population is further
removed from agriculture, conflicts between farmers and their neighbors and municipalities has
increased. Fewer elected officials have an agricultural background, leading to a need to engage
professionals from Cooperative Extension, the Soil and Water District, USDA programs, and even NYS
Agriculture and Markets to help resolve farmer-municipality conflicts.
In response to these changes, this new plan was developed at the grassroots level, with farmer
input gathered, compiled, organized, and prioritized into goals, strategies, and action steps. The priority
initiatives and actions below were developed from input that was provided and summarized.
The New York State requirements for updated County Agricultural and Farmland Protection
Plans include, but are not limited to:
a) The location of any land or areas proposed to be protected;
b) An analysis of the following factors concerning any areas and lands proposed to be
protected:
i) Value to the agricultural economy of the county;
ii) Open space value;
iii) Consequences of possible conversion;
iv) Level of conversion pressure on the lands or areas proposed to be protected;
c) A description of the activities, programs and strategies intended to be used by the county to
promote continued agricultural use.
Vision and Mission
The Vision for Tompkins County Agriculture is a diverse (small and large, variety of enterprises)
and viable farming sector that contributes local food and agricultural product sales resulting in
employment and economic activity. Established farmers plan for the future and new farmers can access
land and other resources to grow their businesses. Farmers follow sound agriculture practices that
protect the environment and contribute to the rural quality of life and scenic landscapes. Consumers
and local policy makers value the contributions that agriculture makes and support policies that allow
for the continuation and expansion of farming enterprises.
The purpose of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan is to prioritize
and guide the actions of county and town governments, agricultural agencies, businesses, farmers, and
the community at large in responding appropriately to the needs, conditions and opportunities that will
maintain a viable agricultural economy in Tompkins County.
The Mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board is to
encourage farming in the County through local initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow
farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
6
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
B. Priority Initiatives and Actions
Agriculture Economic Development
Vision: There are viable farm businesses based on strategic planning, collaboration and networking,
access to resources, infrastructure, and markets.
Priority Actions
A. Link farmers to business and marketing opportunities that enable them to make strategic decisions
to improve business viability.
B. Improve farmers’ link to available resources, programs, supplies, services, funding, processing
facilities, etc. that improve operations and reduce costs.
C. Assist interested producers in evaluating their capacity for agritourism and provide necessary
training, collaborative packaging and promotion assistance. Expand and promote opportunities for
agriculinary tourism in concert with the County Agri-Culinary Tourism Strategy Plan.
D. Ensure farmers are aware of pending federal, state and local regulations and the impacts on their
farming operations.
Local Foods
Vision: There is a vibrant local food system based on local food production supported by local
purchasing and consumption that enables producers to grow and thrive.
Priority Actions
A. Expand local and regional marketing options by identifying new buyers and new products, linking
buyers and producers, promoting buy local policies, and facilitating development of necessary
infrastructure, services, and training (i.e. food safety, GAPs [Good Agriculture Practices])
B. Promote local food purchasing options to consumers and address barriers to local food
consumption through initiatives that improve access
Farmland Protection, Land Use Policy and Regulations
Vision: There are local land use policies and actions that protect farmland, allow the development of
diverse farming enterprises, avoid increased costs of doing business, and ensure access to quality
farmland for future farming.
Priority Actions
A. Education for municipal officials about NYS Agriculture District Law provisions and the implications
of town laws that may impact farming operations
B. Ensure that there is proactive involvement and input from the agriculture community on matters
pertaining to local land use policy
C. Encourage development of Town Agriculture Plans and formation of Town Agriculture Committees
(where they do not exist)
D. Facilitate protection of farmland via permanent easements and prepare a long-range Purchase of
Development Rights Implementation Plan involving interested farmers in the high priority farmland
protection areas (Conservation Strategy and Comprehensive Plan Action).
7
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Agriculture Awareness
Vision: There is community awareness of sound farming practices and agriculture’s contribution to the
economy, rural life, scenic landscapes, natural resources preservation, and local foods
Priority Actions
A. Involve the farm community in active outreach via media, tours, events, classroom visits, town
meetings, neighbor networks, meetings with elected officials, etc. to raise awareness of
agriculture’s impact and needs ; provide training as needed to improve farmer communication skills
B. Focus on educating youth and teachers about farming and where food comes from through training
and classroom education, FFA and 4-H agriculture clubs; hand-on learning initiatives like school
gardens, the Youth Farm Project, farm internships, etc.
Environmental Conservation
Vision: Sustainable farming practices protect natural resources and mitigate negative environmental
impacts on soil, water, ecology, climate, wildlife and people while increasing resilience to address
climate change and environmental challenges.
Priority Actions
Promote sustainable farming practices that protect the environment and contribute to carbon
sequestration. Work should include the increased adoption and funding of Best Management
Practices (BMPs) on farms as well as stream corridor protection efforts.
Work with farmers to prepare for impacts of emerging invasive species and impacts of climate
change.
Link farmers to funding and programs that enable farm energy conservation and maximize farm-
based renewable energy production opportunities (further supported by the Cleaner, Greener
Southern Tier [CGST] Regional Sustainability Plan).
Coordinate regional planning and implementation for priority conservation and agricultural
protection areas (further supported by CGST Regional Sustainability Plan).
Future Farmers/Workforce
Vision: Future farmers and successful farm employees will emerge and thrive through effective
training and mentoring experiences, land access, business transfer, and with effective business
development support.
Priority Actions
A. Promote farm transfer options to farmers and help farmers to plan transferring their farm to family or
non-family members.
B. Help beginning farmers gain access to appropriate training and mentoring programs (e.g.,
Groundswell or TC3 Sustainable Farming Program), farming experience and expertise, land,
markets, and other services that help them successfully establish and build a viable farming
enterprise
C. Focus on educating youth about farming opportunities; encourage enrollment in FFA and 4-H
agriculture clubs; promote hand-on learning through initiatives like school gardens, the Youth Farm
Project, farm internships, etc.
D. Provide training that helps farmers become more effective employers
A.
B.
C.
D.
8
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
C. Implementation Recommendations
Develop and implement an annual work plan that addresses issues the farm community has
identified in this plan.
Compile an annual report that summarizes the advancement of actions identified in this plan to be
shared with the community.
Identify organizations capable and willing to undertake actions with existing resources including the
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board, Cornell Cooperative Extension of
Tompkins County, Tompkins County Planning Department, town officials, and town agricultural
committees, County Soil and Water Conservation District, Federal and State agency partners
(NRCS, FSA, Rural Development, NY Department of Agriculture & Markets, DEC, NYS Economic
Development), Farm Bureau, Groundswell Center for Local Food & Farming, TCAD, Cornell, TC3,
and others.
Engage Cornell University to research key farming questions.
Promote networking among farmers and allied industry partners for mutual benefit.
Make important information easily accessible via an agricultural resource website/info hub.
Secure grants to help with implementing needs identified in this plan; assist farmers in accessing
grant programs to improve their farming operations.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
9
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
D. Background
The Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board (AFPB) has actively led the
implementation of the County’s Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan, adopted by the Tompkins
County Legislature in February 1998. The process of gathering input to write the County’s first
Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan began in 1994 with a survey of the farm community, followed
in 1995 by a Cost of Community Services Study. In 1996, the County received funding from the NYS
Department of Agriculture and Markets to support the development of an Agriculture and Farmland
Protection Plan. The AFPB coordinated a process whereby focus groups provided input in three goal
areas: Agricultural Economic Development, Education, and Government Policies.
The implementation of the County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan has involved the
development of an annual work plan based on the goals, strategies, and action steps identified in the
County Agriculture Plan. To remain relevant to the interests of farmers, the AFPB has gathered input
during the Agricultural District Review period, and conducted a survey of all county farmers in 2002 to
further help focus the annual work plan on goals supported by the farm community. Additionally, in
2006, the AFPB began reviewing the 1998 plan, analyzing data, trends, and pressures on the farming
community.
Cornell Cooperative Extension of Tompkins County Agriculture staff serves as lead support to
the County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board in the implementation of many actions in the
Agriculture Plan. To support this work, the Tompkins County Legislature provides funding that supports
a half-time educator at Cooperative Extension, whose duty is to staff the AFPB and additionally support
implementation of the County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan.
A study to assess the feasibility of a County Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program
was undertaken in the 2002 Tompkins County Agricultural Lands and Natural Areas Preservation
Feasibility Study in which priority farming areas based on soils and farming activity were identified for
protection. In developing the 2004 Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan, these same areas were
identified as the County’s Agriculture Resource Focus Areas, the key areas countywide for farmland
protection.
There has also been continued interest among Tompkins County towns to protect and promote
agriculture. The Town of Ithaca established a Town PDR program in 1999 and, in 2011, completed the
Town’s Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan. The Town of Ulysses has also completed a Town
Agriculture and Farmland Protection plan, and the Town of Lansing Agriculture Plan is in the final
stages of development and adoption (2015). Dryden also recently received state funding (2015) to
develop their municipal agriculture plan in the next 2 years and work has begun to that end.
The AFPB has also been actively promoting and supporting farmer applications for State PDR
funding. Since 2003 a total of 2,597 acres of farmland have been protected on five different farms in the
Towns of Lansing, Dryden, and Ithaca.
E. The Need for a New Plan
The AFPB recognized the need to update the 1998 plan for the following reasons:
The plan was developed 15 years ago and there is a need to re-examine the state of agriculture
and issues impacting agriculture’s future
Some strategies and action steps need refinement to assist with implementation
Many strategies and action steps were implemented
There is a need for a plan that responds to the emerging trends, issues and opportunities
Development pressures and land use around the county have continued to change, impacting
farming operations
Farmers are more cognizant of and interested in farmland protection as evidenced in an increase in
interested PDR applicants
Agriculture continues to diversify to include a strong dairy and field crop base along with many new
enterprises exploring local/regional marketing options
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
10
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Economic development strategies are needed to support the expansion and diversification of
farming
The purpose for updating the County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan is to prioritize
and guide the actions of county and town governments, agricultural agencies, businesses, farmers, and
the community at large in responding appropriately to the needs, conditions and opportunities that will
maintain a viable agricultural economy in Tompkins County.
F. The Process for Updating the Plan
With funding support from the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, the
County undertook the plan update in 2013 and contracted with Cooperative Extension. In kicking off
that update, Cooperative Extension, with direction from the AFPB, conducted Agriculture Sector Focus
Groups to gather sector-specific information. Focus Groups included in-depth interviews with farmers
involved in: Dairy, Field Crops, Equine, Large Livestock, Small Livestock, Market Growers, Forestry,
and Horticulture. These comments were compiled and organized, then reviewed by the AFPB. The
working draft based on focus group input was reviewed by farmers at two public meetings – one on
November 20, 2013 (attendance 35) and then again at the annual Ag Summit in February 26, 2014
(attendance 45). Based on farmer input and APPB review, the resulting themes emerged:
Agricultural Economic Development
Local Foods
Land Use Policy
Agricultural Awareness
Environmental Quality
Future Farmers/Workforce
Farmer comments were organized by theme, and then developed into Strategies and Action Steps.
Data collection occurred concurrently. The most recent National Agriculture Census data for
Tompkins County (2012) was reviewed and used to create tables and charts to provide a better
understanding of agricultural trends. Cooperative Extension assembled a county-wide farmer database
which contains where and how much owned and rented land farmers work in the county, including
farms whose base of operation is beyond County borders. It also indicates the primary operation type,
annual income range, and estimated investment over the past seven years. Information from County
Assessment, Agriculture District review data, and Cooperative Extension Agriculture Staff knowledge of
county farming operations further contributed to the database. NOTE: this database contains farm
specific confidential information that is not released to the public.
The compiled data and theme goals and strategies were shared at a County Planning Advisory
Board (PAB) meeting on June 25, 2014. A smaller group of PAB members agreed to work as a
subcommittee and provided further feedback as the plan develops.
Further editing and compilation of the plan continued throughout 2014 with ongoing input from
the County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board. Two farmer and landowner meetings were held
on March 4, 2015 at the Ulysses Town Hall and March 10, 2015 at the Lansing Town Hall to gain
further input on strategies in the plan and to identify any gaps. A compiled draft plan was submitted to
the PAB on March 25, 2015.
Cooperative Extension Agriculture Educators, Monika Roth and Debbie Teeter, with Scott Doyle
from the Tompkins County Planning Department, served as the lead authors for the plan. The AFPB
and the PAB sub-committee provided ongoing review and feedback. The completed plan was shared at
public meetings on the following dates:
The final plan was presented to the County Legislature for a public hearing on XXXX and approved by
Tompkins County on XXXX.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
11
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Part II Status of Agriculture in Tompkins County
A. Significance of Agriculture in Tompkins County
Agriculture in Tompkins
County contributes to both the
economy and landscape in
complex and significant ways.
According to the 2012 United
States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Census of
Agriculture, 558 farms own or
rent a total of 90,774 acres of
land in the county resulting in an
actively farmed landscape that
occupies about 30% of
Tompkins County total land
area. Based on agricultural
assessment, Agricultural District
surveys, and first-hand
knowledge of the CCE-
Tompkins Agriculture team, the Part II, A. Chart 1 number of active farms is closer
to 280. The difference in
numbers is because individuals self-select to complete the
Census survey, and some respondents might more
accurately be described as “backyard enthusiasts”, and
also because the USDA has an elaborate system of
estimating for non-respondents. The information in this
section is based on both the Census of Agriculture and
locally-collected data in an effort to present a complete
and accurate picture.
The amount of farmland has declined historically
from our agrarian past when in 1950 over 200,000 acres
of the county, almost two-thirds, was farmed. Over in the
past 20 years, there has been some stability within a
range of 30-35% of the land being farmed. This stability is
in part reflective of farming now being primarily associated
of prime or important soil types. However, recently there is Part II, A. Chart 2increasing demand for land among farmers and there is
evidence that inactive, abandoned, and fallow land is
being returned to farming (Tompkins County Planning Department Land Use Land Cover data, 2012).
Land used (owned as well as rented: see Part II, A. Chart 1) by individual farmers’ ranges from
under 10 acres to over 2000. Fifteen years ago, there were five farms in the county working over 1000
acres, and none working more than 2000. Today, there are four farms working over 2000 acres, 17
working from 1000 to 2000 acres, and 29 working 500 to 999 acres – over one third of Tompkins
County Farms are working over 500 acres [See Part II, A. Chart 2 for a aces worked by farm size]. This
does not tell the whole story, however, as there are at least a dozen dairy and field crop farms with a
large base of operation outside of Tompkins County, who work land in the county that may not be
counted in the Tompkins County Agriculture census data. However, this acreage is captured during the
Agriculture District review process.
Agriculture is most concentrated in the northeastern corner of the county in the Towns of
Dryden, Groton, and Lansing. On the northwestern edge, the Towns of Enfield and Ulysses have large,
rolling tracts of farmland flowing into adjoining counties. In the southern portion of the county, in the
Acres Owned & Rented by Sector
12
Dairy, Owned: 22,542 acres
Dairy, Rented: 15,357 acres
liil Field Crops, Owned: 14,586 acres
II Field Crops, Rented: 19,175 acres
Livestock, Owned: 9,282 acres
Livestock, Rented : 1,394 acres
Iii Market/Hort, Owned : 3,164 acres
iii Market/Hort, Rented : 306 acres
Farms by Acreage Worked
17, 6% 4, l%
Under20
20-49
Iii 50-99
100-499
500-999
1000-1999
w over 2000
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Towns of Newfield, Danby, and
Caroline, agriculture remains on
the better soils both in valleys and
hillsides. Agriculture in the Town of
Ithaca is located near town’s
borders to the east, south, and
west, and typically bounded by
residential development on the
Ithaca side and other farmland in
adjacent towns. [See Part II, A.
Chart 3]
While the Census of
Agriculture reports 558 county
farms, there are only 125 with
sales above $40,000. In the Ag
Part II, A. Chart 3 Census, 49% or 273 of the 558
respondents indicated farming as their primary occupation. Farms that generate between $10,000 and
$40,000 in sales are be considered very part-time enterprises or limited resource farms. The Census
defines small farms as those with under $250,000 in sales, which includes 85% (502) of the county’s
total farms. Of these small family farms, 241 are considered lower income farms. The balance being
lifestyle farms, many with sales below $10,000. A total of 213 farms receive New York State Agricultural
Assessment, meaning they generate at least $10,000.
County farmers generate $67.4 million in product sales, the majority of which is exported in the
form of milk, livestock and commodity crop sales (approximately $50 million). The balance of sales
includes horticultural crops and small livestock, primarily sold directly to consumers. These operations
are not accurately captured in the Ag Census given that many are new to farming and may not be
receiving Ag Census surveys so it is assumed that direct market sales are underestimated in the Ag
Census. Cooperative Extension estimates that direct market sales via farmers markets, CSA’s, at farm
sales, sales to restaurants and retailers is at least $20 million, which is higher than the Census reports.
However, some of the sales to these various outlets are by farmers located outside the county, which
may account for some of the difference.
In 2012, 166 farms in Tompkins County hired farm laborers. Of the 975 workers hired, 444
workers were employed for 150 days or more within a year while the remaining 531 workers were
employed for less than 150 days each year representing more seasonal work. In addition to paid
employees, 262 farms also reported using unpaid workers. Unpaid workers include non-operator
partners and family members.
Chart 10—Number of Farms that Hire Farm Labor by Number of Workers
Tompkins County, 2012 Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1 worker 2 workers
Farmed &cres by Town
Caroline: 8,694 acres
Danby : 4,160 acres
Dryden : 10,674 acres
Enfield: 10,848 acres
Groton : 15,756 acres
Ithaca : 3,013 acres
Iii Lansing: 17,167 acres
Newfield : 6,673 acres
llill Ulysses : 9,230 acres
3-4 workers 5-9 workers 10 workers +
13
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
B. Agricultural Trends – Looking Backward and Forward: Farm Data
In analyzing agriculture trends in Tompkins County, it is important to look both at current data as
well as past records. The USDA Census of Agriculture has been conducted at five-year intervals since
the early 1900’s and thus provides the only reliable source of long term data that illustrates trends. For
this report, we focused on the past 20-30 years to assess more recent trends. Earlier historic data can
be found in the Report: Study of Tompkins Agriculture: Phase I – Tompkins County Agriculture &
Farmland Protection Plan, October 1996.
1. Historic Trends
Table 1—Historic Farm Base Summary, Tompkins County, 1978-2012
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
1978 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012
Number of Farms 598 567 532 441 557 563 588 558
Total Farm Acreage 123,210 121,068 110,609 91,822 102,610 100,931 108,739 90,774
Average Acreage per Farm 214 208 208 184 179 185 163
Harvested Cropland 79,982 77,047 75,634 62,421 67,731 66,960 67,292 54,424
Woodland ~ ~20,329 16,921 19,245 18,959 21,838 19,183
Other Land* ~ ~14,646 12,480 13,898 15,012 19,609 17,167
% of County in Farmland 39% 39% 35% 29% 33% 32% 35% 30%
Total Market value of
Agricultural Sales ($1,000)
30,904 39,624 42,056 50,720 48,139 41,908 60,185 67,391
*Other land: land that is not harvested crop or woodland, includes permanent pasture, farm roads, hedgerows, etc.
2. Number of Farms
Table 1 includes US Census of Agriculture Data, collected at five-year increments from 1978 to
2012. While the total number of farms in the county has rebounded 33% from a 1992 low to 2007 high,
this trend was reversed slightly in recent census data that reflected a 5% loss in total number of farms
from 2007-2012. The current 558 operations represent an overall 6.8% loss from 1978 levels. Overall,
these variations are relatively insignificant and could be attributed to Ag Census estimation errors or
changes in methodology or changing economic conditions. For example, in 1986 there was a national
dairy farm buyout program during which a number of dairy farmers sold their herd, but many held on to
their land.
3. Land in Farms
Similar to the total number of farms, total farm acreage was lowest in 1992, rebounded 18%
from 1992 to 2007 and then fell 17% from 2007 to 2012. The current 90,774 acres in farmland in
Tompkins County remains 26% below the 1978 peak. Again, the variation could be due to changes in
Ag Census methodology. Over the past 35 years, the percentage of the county’s total land area
(308,500 acres) in farmland has consistently fluctuated between 29%-39%. Farmland currently
occupies nearly one third of the county’s total land area and therefore remains a significant land use.
4. Average Acreage per Farm
The average acres-per-farm has been driven down by the increase in small farm numbers.
While there is growth in the number of small farms, there is also a continued accumulation of land
among larger farm operations which contributes to overall stability of land in agriculture; many farms
are getting bigger.
14
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
5. Cropland Acreage
As seen in Table 1, above, the acres of
harvested cropland have been decreasing over
time from 79,982 acres in 1978 to 54,424 acres in
2012; a 25,558 reduction in land that is harvested.
While cropland experienced nearly a 22%
decrease from 1978-1992, it has slowly
rebounded over the last decade. About 87% of
this cropland is currently harvested, representing
a slight increase in intensity of use over 1997
levels.
The chart to the right illustrates while acres of
harvested cropland has decreased (as reported in
Table 1 above), farmers are harvesting crops from
a greater percentage of the land that is harvested.
This means that farmers are using more of
their land for active farming and leaving less idle.
In part this is reflective of agricultural activities
becoming concentrated on higher quality soils.
Harvested cropland includes: annual crops and
hay.
6. Farms by Type and Market Value
In the period between1992-2012 the
composition of farms by type has shifted slightly
away from cattle, hogs/pigs and wheat and
towards vegetable, soybean and poultry
production. However, despite this shift, dairy
remains the sector with the largest market value
sales. In 2012, milk sales alone represented a
market value of $37,831,000. The market value of
the dairy sector is 4.6 times greater than the next
most profitable sector, which is grain. For the
most part grain and hay are grown as feed for
dairy cattle.
Table 2 - Farms by Type
Tompkins County, 1992 & 2012
Source USDA Census of Agriculture
Enterprise Type 1992 2012 % change
Corn 80 84 5%
Wheat 45 17 -62%
Soybeans 13 29 123%
Vegetables 27 66 144%
Fruits, Tree Nuts, Berries 19 29 53%
Cattle, includes dairy & beef 221 123 -44%
Poultry 12 71 492%
Hogs, Pigs 25 18 -28%
Sheep, Lambs 32 40 25%
Farm Cropland by Use Tompkins County 1997-2012
Source USDA Census of Agriculture
Table 3 - Farms by Type & Market Value
Tompkins County, 2012
Source USDA Census of Agriculture
Enterprise Type
Market
Value
($1,000)
Number
of
Farms
Grains, oilseeds, dry
beans, and dry peas $8,310 110
Vegetables, melons,
potatoes $5,396 66
Fruits, tree nuts, and
berries $555 39
Nursery, greenhouse,
floriculture, and sod $4,242 54
Cut Christmas trees and
short rotation woody crops $237 15
Other crops and hay $3,950 172
Poultry and eggs $60 71
Cattle and calves $5,334 123
Milk from cows $37,831 55
Hogs and pigs $211 18
Sheep, goats, wool,
mohair, and milk $430 56
Horses, ponies, mules,
burros, and donkeys $713 16
Other animals and animal
products $122 35
Need dairy in the table separate from other cattle
?;e.
-----
15
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1997 2002 2007
Other Cropland
■ Cropland Used Only for Pasture or Grazing
Harvested Cropland
2012
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Chart 2—Total Agricultural Sales, Nominal & Adjusted 7. Agricultural Sales Tompkins County, 1978-2012 As shown in Table 1, the Source: USDA Census of Agriculture market value of agriculture
products appears to have been
increasing at a steady rate,
having more than doubled since
1978 ($30,904,000) compared to
2012 ($67,391,000).
However, adjusting all sales to
2012 dollars, the real value of
agricultural sales in Tompkins
County has actually gradually
decreased 34.5% since 1978 to
its current real value of around
$67.4 million [chart 2].
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
$67,391.00
$60,000
Total Market
$40,000
$102,834.88
value of
Agricultural
$20,000 Sales ($1,000)
in 2012 dollars
$0
8. Regional Variation
A comparison of Tompkins County agriculture data with the surrounding south central New York
counties provides an indication of the vitality of local agriculture. In the Ag Census official “Southern NY
Statistical Region” (Broome, Chemung, Schuyler, Tioga, Tompkins), Tompkins County shows no
significant increase in farm numbers. Growth in farm numbers in Schuyler County may be due to grape
farms, and the large increase in farms in Seneca County is most likely due to the influx of Amish and
Mennonite farmers. During the period of 1997 to 2012, all other surrounding counties lost farms some
at a rate higher than NYS.
Table 4—Number of Farms Table 5—Acres in Farms
Southern New York Region, 1997-2012 Southern Region, 1997-2012
Source USDA Census of Agriculture Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
County/Area 1997 2012 # Change % Change
Broome 627 563 -64 -10.21%
Cayuga 1,022 891 -131 -12.82%
Chemung 393 372 -21 -5.34%
Cortland 538 518 -20 -3.72%
Schuyler 388 393 5 1.29%
Seneca 487 584 97 19.92%
Tioga 571 536 -35 -6.13%
Tompkins 557 558 1 0.18%
Regional
NYS Total
4,583
38,264
4,415
35,537
-168
-2,727
-3.67%
-7.13%
County/Area 1997 2012 Change % Change
Broome 93,922 79,676 -14,246 -15.17%
Cayuga 274,369 238,444 -35,925 -13.09%
Chemung 67,855 58,114 -9,741 -14.36%
Cortland 128,620 115,024 -13,596 -10.57%
Schuyler 74,440 69,222 -5,218 -7.01%
Seneca 126,052 130,206 4,154 3.30%
Tioga 114,289 107,873 -6,416 -5.61%
Tompkins 102,610 90,774 -11,836 -11.53%
Regional
NYS Total
982,157
7,788,241
889,333
7,183,576
-92,824
-604,665
-9.45%
-7.76%
Tompkins County acres of farmland dropped at a rate that is greater than New York State for
the period of 1997-2012. From 1997-2012, Seneca County was the only county in the region to
experience growth in land in farms, which corresponds to the gain in farm numbers and is most likely
due to the increasing Amish/Mennonite farming community. From 1997-2012, Tompkins County
experienced a negative growth rate of 11.53%. Much of this loss in farmlands occurred from 2007-
2012. Whereas from 1997-2007, Tompkins County experienced a positive growth rate of 6%, from
2007-2012 Tompkins County lost 11,836 acres of land in farm totaling a 16.5% loss within the five-year
period. [Note: this statistic is not supported by local data: if more than 10,000 acres in farmland were lost in the
last five years, its locations would be easily identifiable. That’s an enormous amount of farmland – it would be the
equivalent of losing five of our biggest farms. As mentioned earlier, we’ve seen a tightening up of available
farmland, and a fair amount of fallow land brought back into production, over the past five years.]
....
I I
16
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
9. Current Composition of Tompkins County Farms
Despite a weakening market base,Table 6 – Percentage Change in Farms by Farm Size
Tompkins County maintains a strong Tompkins County, 1997-2012
Source: US Ag Census historic and regional farmland base. The
types of farms that make up this foundation
are increasingly varied. [see Part II, A.
Chart 1]
Small farms (1-99 acres) now make
up the greatest percentage of Tompkins
County farming enterprises, totaling 350
operations, a 22% increase from 1997.
Year
Small
(1-99)
Medium
(100-259)
Large
(260-999)
Extra Large
(1000-2000+)
1997 288 139 121 9
2002 323 126 99 15
2007 348 129 84 27
2012 350 116 73 19
% Change 22% -17% -40% 111%
These farms represent 63% of all operations located within the county. Within this group, farms
ranging in size from 10-49 acres constitute 34% of the county’s farming operations. The increased
presence of small farms helps to explain the falling average acreage per farm observed earlier in Table
1.
Extra-large farms (1000+ acres) increased from 9 farms in 1997 to 27 farms in 2007
representing a 200% increase. From 2007 to 2012, the number of extra-large farms fell back to 19
farms, representing a 30% loss from the 2007 peak. It is important to note that even at the 2007 peak of
27, extra-large farms still only represented 5% of all farming operations in Tompkins County. The
difference between 2007 and 2012 data may be attributable to a data collection adjustment and the
economic downturn in 2008.
In contrast, the number of medium farms (100-259 acres) and large farms (260-1000 acres) has
decreased consistently over the past fifteen years. From 1997 to 2012, large farms in particular
dropped 40%, from 121 to 73 farms. Large farms now only constitute about 13% of the total operations
in Tompkins County. Medium farms dropped 17% from 139 to 116 farms and now constitute 21% of
total operations in Tompkins County. This trend is consistent with national agriculture data trends. The
loss of farms in the middle does not necessarily equate to loss of land in farming. However, it does
represent the loss of social and community capital in the farm sector.
There does not appear to be a large shift of small farms to the medium category, however, the
small farm category is steadily growing. There also does not appear to be a shift of medium sized
farms into the large farm category. However, there is some shift of large farms into the extra large
category as evidenced in the table and as noted by Extension Educators working with these farms.
10.Farms by Sales Class
Chart 3—Number of Farms by Sales Class, Tompkins County, 2012
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
Over $500,000
$250,000 - $499,999
$100,000 - $249,999
$50,000 - $99,999
$40,000 - $49,999 5
57
48
66
67
25
26
31
40
25
25
143
$25,000 - $39,999
$20,000 - $24,999
$10,000 - $19,999
$5,000 - $9,999
$2,500 - $4,999
$1,000 - $2,499
Less than $1,000
0 50 100 150 200
2012 Farm Income
17
2012
Farm
Income
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Chart 4—Percentage of Farms by Sales Class, Tompkins County, 1997-2012
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
19.4%
13.6%
13.1%
10.4%
10.8%
3.4%
5.2%
2.3%
6.3%
9.7%
3.6%
2.2%
32.3%
13.1%
9.1%
9.1%
7.6%
1.8%
3.7%
1.6%
8.7%
6.4%
3.6%
3.0%
36.2%
6.5%
7.1%
10.5%
10.0%
2.2%
2.9%
1.4%
6.1%
8.3%
4.3%
4.4%
25.6%
10.2%
8.6%
11.8%
12.0%
4.5%
4.7%
0.9%
5.6%
7.2%
4.5%
4.5%
Chart 4 illustrates a general increase in sales across the board for farm operations since 1997,
and a consistent increase since 2007. In 2012, there was a decrease in farms reporting an income of
$1000, and an increase in every income category above it until $40,000 – 49,999 (which is the center of
the hourglass that defines the difference between small and large farms), then general increases
beyond that point. There is another decrease between $40,000-$250,000 with all categories above it
growing in 2012. [See Agricultural Sales Chart 2]
$500,000 +
. =--
$250,000 to $499,999
. ==
$100,000 to $249,000
$50,000 to $99,999
$40,000 to $49,999 ~
"' $25,000 to $39,999 "' ~
Ill
'O
"' cu
"iu $20,000 to $24,999 Ill =-
$10,000 to $19,999
$5,000 to $9,999
$2,500 to $4,999
$1,000 to $2,499
Less than $1,000
0.0%
,I
..
I
,-
_...,
-·
.
10 .0% 20.0%
% of Farms
18
-
30.0%
11 2012
W2007
11 2002
1997
~
40.0%
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
11. Demographics of Farming Population
In general, farms with sales between $20,000 and $50,000 span the gap between part-time and
full-time operations. This can pose financial challenges unless the individual or family income situation
is flexible to accommodate lower sales. Off farm income plays an important roles in farm and household
viability.
It is interesting that the Agriculture Census includes data is the number of farms making less
than $1,000. Of the total farms (558), 25.6%, or 143 farms fall into this sales class. The USDA
identifies any operation grossing $1000 or more (or having the potential to generate that income) as a
farm, and they identify these respondents through the collection and review of many data sources that
may include landowners renting to farmers that may be eligible for federal conservation programs via
NRCS. It could include someone raising a few beef cattle and selling 1-2 every other year, or a
recreational equine owner who buys and sells horses from time to time. However, these farms grew in
numbers, 16.8%, from 1997-2007, and then began falling from 2007 through 2012 – since the sales
categories above this one each increased in numbers during that same period; it is possible that some
of these operations increased their sales above $1000 rather than went out of business.
While it would appear the most growth in farm sales from 2007-2012 is seen in farms making
from $1,000-$25,000, it’s important to remember relativity. For example, a farm making $1000 one year
and $2000 the next has seen a 100% increase, while a farm with $100,000 in sales with an increase in
sales of $10,000 the next year has only a 10% increase.
The lower end of this chart most likely includes very small to medium-sized produce and meat
farmers, and some honey and maple producers. Farms with sales of $50,000 and up include those
raising livestock and produce for local markets as well as field crops and dairy operations.
The USDA defines small farms as those with sales under $250,000 based on a nation-wide
perspective. Using this definition, 502 Tompkins County farmers or the majority would be considered
small farmers. However, locally, we consider farms with sales of $40,000 or more as significant part-
time or full time operations, and look more at acreage than income in identifying farms by size.
It is important to note that many of the farms surveyed in the US Census of Agriculture are run
by operators whose primary occupation is something other than farming. If we assume that a farm must
make $40,000 or more in sales to support a farmer as his or her primary occupation, only 23% of farms
in Tompkins County qualify as primary occupation farms. This is in contrast 2012 Ag Census data
where 282 farms reported their primary income from farming and 276 as from other than farming
sources (49%). Many small farmers may report farming as their primary income if they are phasing
down near retirement. When land has been in farming for many generations, those who have operated
the land tend to consider themselves as farmers even the operation is no longer actively farmed.
Tompkins County increasingly consists of small, secondary operations and farms that have
expanded steadily over time to remain economically viable.
12.Farm Typology
Chart 5—Number of Farms by Farm Type, Tompkins County, 2007
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
24
Iii Large Family Farms
Very Large Family
Farms
Nonfamily Farms
Iii Small Family Farms
-
Limited Resource
11 Retirement
Residential/Lifestyle
Farming
Occupation/Lower Sales
Farming
Occupation/Higher
Sales
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
For the 2007 USDA Census of Agriculture, the department developed a typology of farms from
small to large and lifestyle farms that further characterizes farming operations. Small family farms with
sales of less than $250,000 annually constituted 85% of Tompkins County farms. Of this group,
residential/lifestyle farms made up the largest portion of these small family farms. The USDA considers
a “small family farm” to fall into the residential/lifestyle category if the operation makes less than
$250,000 in sales and if the principal operator reports his/her primary occupation as other than farming.
Small family farms constituted 41% of the number of farms in Tompkins County in 2007. When
combined with retirement farms, this figure jumps to 52% of the county’s farms, indicating that 48% of
the county’s farms in 2007 were run by operators whose sole occupation was farming.
NOTE: This data breakdown was not summarized in the 2012 Ag Census.
13.Farming as Primary Occupation
The percentage of Chart 6—Primary Occupation of Farmer
operators reporting farming as Tompkins County, 1997-2012
their primary occupation has Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
fluctuated above and below 50%
of total farms over the past two
decades. In 2012, 49.5% of
principal operators in Tompkins
County reported their primary
occupation as something other
than farming. In 2007, 52% of
principal operators in Tompkins
County reported their primary
occupation as something other
than farming. This roughly
accounts for all the
residential/lifestyle farmers (41%)
as well as retired farmers (11%)
described in the 2007 farm
typology survey.
14.Age of Farm Operators
Chart 7—Percentage of Principal Operators by Age Group
Tompkins County, 1987-2012
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
—
-
70+
65-69 years
60-64 years
55-59 years
45-54 years
35-44 years
25-34 years
Under 25 years
1992
1987 2012
7 .9 Yo ~
7 .9 Yo ~
9 .8%
13 .3% -
-
24.1% --
-
22.9% -
~ -
12.8% ~ 2 .0% ~-
1.3% ii 1 .3%
30% 20% 10% 0%
% of Operators
20
1997
.2%
9.1%
10%
2002
Year
2007
19 .4%
17.9%
8.6%
2012
23.5%
-,-
20% 30%
Other
Farming
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Tompkins County farmers are Chart 8—Percentage of Principal Operators
aging. Between 1978 to 2012 there has by Age Group
been a steady increase in the average Tompkins County, 1987-2012
age of the county’s farm population.Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
Since 1978, the average age of principal
operators in Tompkins County has
increased from 49.2 years to 58.3 years.
2012 was the first year since 1978 in
which Tompkins County farmers were
older than the New York State average
of 56.2 years Chart 8. The average age
of principal operators in Tompkins
County roughly equals the average age
of principal operators in the United
States at 58.3 years.
In 2012, principal operators 55
years or older constitute 64% of the
county’s farm operators. Meanwhile the
base of young farmers under 35 years
has decreased from 14% to just over 3%
during the past twenty-five years.
This is a very surprising statistic and is questioned given the significant increase in beginning
farmers in Tompkins County. In the past 3 years, 36 new young farmers have started to farm in the
area (data from Groundswell Center for Local Food and Farming). In addition, CCETC works with
many new market farmers each year. [Also Note: according to the USDA General Explanation and Census of
Agriculture Report Form, data is collected for up to three operators per farm; however older operators may be
“retired” and still report farming as their primary occupation.].
15.Farm Tenure
Chart 9—Tenure of Principal Operator Tompkins County, 1992-2012
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
The tenure of principal operators has not changed significantly over time [Chart 9]. Most farmers
(77%) report farming for 10 years or more. From 1992-2007, there was a slight growth in less
experienced farmers. However, from 2007-2012, the number of newer farmers was slightly lower. This
could be due to the graduation of those operators with 5-9 years of experience into the 10+years of
tenure category with a lack of a new base to replace them.
This scenario becomes worrisome when combined with the age of operator data. Ag Census
data suggests that Tompkins County farmers are becoming older and more experienced but lack a
700
jij 600
12. ·g .,, 500
;f .S 400 .... "' ~ i 300 1' 0 E 200
:::, z 100
0
cu
60
58
56
.'l 54
:0 52 "' i so
<C
48
46
44
1978 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012
Year
10+ Years
5-9 Years
11 3-4 Years
0-2 Years
1992 1997 2002 2007 2012
Year
21
TC Average
NYS Average
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
base of younger, less-experienced farmers to pass this knowledge onto. If Tompkins County does not
create this base of younger farmers, we may begin to see a decrease in the total number of farmers
and farm operations as an aging population retires without anyone to take up their legacy. These
predicted trends are validated with 2012 data, showing a 5% decrease in the number of total farms in
Tompkins County as well as a 5% increase in the age of principal operator from 2007-2012. This
marks the largest percentage growth in the age of principal operator since 1978 as well as the first time
that the number of farms has declined in Tompkins County since 1992.
16.Gender of Operators
Table 11—Female Operators, Tompkins County, 2002-2012
Source: USDA Census of Agriculture
2002 2007 2012
All Farms w/ a Woman Operator 250 345 311
# of women operators 261 371 331
Land in farms (acres) 37,810 47,817 33,163
Farms w/ a Woman Principal Operator 117 175 144
Land in farms (acres) 11,102 11,719 8,530
In 2012, 144 or nearly 26% of the principal operators in Tompkins County were women. The
number of principal operators who are women increased 50% from 2002-2007 before declining 18%
from 2007-2012. Despite controlling over a quarter of the total number of farms, these farms only
represent 8,530 acres, or 9.4% of the total land farmed in Tompkins County.
Trends Summary
Longer term historic trends show decreasing farm numbers and farm acreage, however in the
past 30 years there has been relative stability in Tompkins County agriculture. The numbers of farms
and land in farms has varied slightly but is not significant overall. The 558 Agriculture Census-identified
farms in the county own and operate approximately 30% of the county’s land (90,774 acres), and
generate $67.4 million in sales. While sales appear to have doubled in the past 30 years, from $30
million to $67million, when adjusted for inflation, there has been a 34% decline in value.
There is an increasing diversity of farm operations in the county; however, dairy continues to be
the sector with the highest market value ($37 million from milk sales). Local food production and
organic agriculture are areas that have expanded significantly in the past 30 years. Local food sales
(from farms within a 30 mile radius of Ithaca) amount to over $20 million dollars annually (CCETC data
sources). Many of the local food producers farm using organic methods. A total of 16,000 acres of the
county’s harvested cropland is organically managed. There are five organic dairy farms, two organic
crop farms (raising feed for organic dairies) and the balance are small produce farms. In addition, while
many area livestock producers may not be certified-organic, animals are “naturally raised” on pasture
(grazing) with no added hormones or antibiotics.
Small farms, according to the USDA definition of having sales under $250,000, constitute 85%
(502) of the Tompkins County farm community. Of the 558 total farms in the Ag Census, 50.5% of
reported their primary occupation as farming. However, only 23% of total farms in Tompkins County
have sales over $40,000. In order to sustain their families, many depend on other sources of income.
Regardless of primary occupation, Tompkins County farmers are aging. When analyzed
alongside patterns of tenure, both trends suggest that Tompkins County farmers are becoming older
and more experienced but lack a base of younger, less-experienced farmers to pass this knowledge
onto. This brings about serious questions as to how Tompkins County will pass its strong farmland
base onto the next generation. However, there are systems in place to ensure this transition of farming
and farmland will take place. Groundswell Center for Local Food and Farming and Cornell Cooperative
Extension of Tompkins County are actively engaged in working with beginning and new farmers. In the
22
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
past 3 years, 36 farmers have launched new businesses after completing the Farm Business Training
course offered by Groundswell and CCETC. Additionally, CCETC staff meets annually with at least 12-
20 new farm startups. It is most likely these farms are not captured in Ag Census data until they file a
federal farm tax return. Additionally, the Finger Lakes LandLink website, launched in March 2014, is
serving as an online resource to help new farmers find land. As a result of this Agriculture Plan, a
priority is being placed on fostering farm transitions and future farmers. CCETC has received a USDA
Risk Management grant (March 2015) to assist established farmers with business transition planning.
Finally, women play a role as principal operators of 26% of the county farm operations yet only
own about 10% of the farmland demonstrating some degree of gender inequality in farm ownership. In
addition, while there are few minority farmers (race, ethnicity) in the county among the older generation,
there is more diversity among new farmers (at present there are: four Asian, two African American, one
Hispanic, and one new immigrant farmers in the county). The Hispanic workforce on dairy farms plays a
significant role in the stability of that sector by providing a reliable workforce. It is estimated that there
are 60 dairies actively farming in Tompkins County, providing full time employment for over 100 owners
(family members and partners) and around 275 employees. Eight of these dairies have their base of
operation beyond Tompkins County borders, and account for about 20 owners and 115 full time
employees. There are many other part-time and seasonal employees.
23
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
C. Environmental Assessment
1.Tompkins County Agriculture and the Environment
As a working landscape, agriculture in Tompkins County plays a key role in defining the region’s
agrarian culture and wide sweeping scenic vistas. These agricultural resources also contribute to the
health of our natural resources including forest land, soil and water resources including streams and
wetlands. The relationship between working landscapes, natural and water resources may also be
strained by a changing climate.
2.Natural Resources
Tompkins County is known for high quality
soils and historic farmland, and also its woods,
viewsheds and clean water. The Tompkins County
Comprehensive Plan identified important swaths of
land within the Cayuga Lake, Owasco Lake and
Susquehanna River watersheds including Unique
Natural Areas (as identified by the Tompkins County
Environmental Management Council), wetlands,
stream corridors, public drinking water resources,
Important Bird Areas, and hiking and multi-use trails
and trail corridors. The Comprehensive Plan
identified 14 distinct Natural Features Focus Areas
(NFFAs), which cover approximately 20,000 acres of
land. Over 13,000 of that acreage intersects the
Agricultural Resource Focus Areas (ARFAs), those
areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan as they
highest quality farmland. Management of farmland in
a way that supports the key functions of the NFFAs
will provide multiple benefits to these important
areas. As an example, a local farmer in the North
Lansing – West Groton ARFA recently requested the
development of a Forest Stewardship Plan for an
important riparian forest on this farm by a
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)
Forester. The plan, created at no cost, helped the
farmer, and a Cooperating Forester, to identify which
stands to thin and with what frequency to maintain
forest health and function. The result was a healthy
harvest that also netted the farmer higher revenue.
3.Water Resources
Virtually every farm in the county has an onsite water source in the form of a perennial or
intermittent stream, wetland or pond. In many cases these resources are very well respected by the
provision of stream or wetland buffers, though in some cases if mismanaged can have adverse impacts
on surrounding properties, water quality, and plant and animal communities that rely on those
resources. Farms can utilize local, state and federal funds to improve the on-farm multi-beneficial
relationships between working lands and water resources. A holistic tool for planning for water quality
improvement on farmland is the Agricultural Environmental Management (AEM) process. This is a
program administered through the Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District.
The AEM Strategic Plan for 2015-2020 targets watersheds in the Cayuga and Owasco Lake
drainage areas for Best Management Practice (BMP) planning and implementation. This corresponds
24
t I
Agricultural R and Natural F::~u rce Focus Areas ures Focus A reas
w--•~' rm--=·-.
,I ~ • ~-I,
~ 1_
~ Agricultural R
-
esource Fo cus
Natural F . Areas
eatures Focu A 5 reas
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
to the high density of agricultural lands in the Groton, Dryden Lansing and Northwestern portions of the
county. Practices such as cover cropping, barnyard improvements, proper manure storage and
handling, and reduced tillage are just some of the examples of BMP’s that can be utilized on working
agricultural lands through the AEM Program to protect water quality. The Federal government
cooperates with this program through the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) to provide
BMP standards and specifications to farmers along with funding assistance through various programs
in the USDA Farm Bill. With nearly 30% of the county’s total land base being actively farmed and
avenues to protect water resources through the AEM program and NRCS, farming is one of the best
tools to conserve the natural resources of Tompkins County.
As is noted in the 2015 Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan, the impacts of land use on
water resources ultimately affect Cayuga Lake. The shallow southern end of Cayuga Lake is more
vulnerable to pollution than the deeper portions of the lake. As the bodies which feed the southern
basin of the lake, Fall Creek, Cayuga Inlet, and Six Mile Creek play a significant role in determining the
quality of water. It is estimated that they contribute approximately 40 percent of all the surface water
entering the southern end of the lake.
The Federal Clean Water Act requires states to periodically assess and report on the quality of
their waters, and to identify impaired waters where designated uses, such as public drinking water, are
not fully supported. For waters that are determined to be impaired, states must consider the
development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) or other strategies to reduce the input of the
specific pollutants. Impaired water bodies and their related pollutants, are published by the New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) on the New York State Section 303(d) List
of Impaired/TMDL Waters. The most recent list published in 2012 identified the southern end of Cayuga
Lake as impaired by three pollutants: phosphorus, silt/sediment, and pathogens.
Sediment binds to phosphorous carried by Fall Creek, Cayuga Inlet, and Six Mile Creek. This
sediment is largely the result of stormwater runoff and erosion of streambanks. A strategy to address
phosphorus should be developed to address methods to reduce the amount of phosphorus found in
these tributaries. In addition to sediment-bound phosphorus, phosphorus also enters the southern end
of the lake from point sources, including the City’s wastewater treatment plant and the Cornell Lake
Source Cooling heat exchange facility.
As a condition of continuing the SPDES permit for the Lake Source Cooling facility, NYSDEC
and Cornell University have agreed to conduct a detailed study of the sources and ultimate use of
phosphorus in Cayuga Lake. The study, estimated for completion in June 2016, will build a water
quality model of a detailed analysis of the shallow southern end of the lake, and contributing
watersheds in order to provide a better understanding of
where phosphorus comes from and how it affects the lake
ecosystem. Once completed, the model will help NYSDEC
determine whether a TMDL or other strategy is necessary to
address the amount and concentration of phosphorus in the
southern end of Cayuga Lake.
4.Soil Resources
Agricultural operations also play a vital role in
maintaining soil health throughout the landscape. Soil health
is being recognized globally as the optimization of physical,
biological and chemical properties in the soil. Tompkins
County has rich soils in the northeast and northwestern
portions of the county. Through proper management
techniques such as no-till cropping, cover crops, and other
BMP’s, farmers help to maintain soil health. Organic farming
and permanent pastures also help to rebuild the biological
and chemical properties of the soil. Prime soils and soils of
statewide significance are a finite resource. With
development pressure threatening the loss of more and more
Soils Definitions
Prime soils – have the best combination of
physical and chemical characteristics for
agricultural production with minimal inputs
of fertilizer, lime, etc. to produce highest
and best yields for viable agriculture.
Prime soils are characterized by having
high lime, high nutrient supply capacity,
good structure/texture, well drained (or
when artificially drained), flat to gently
sloping, and significant depth before
reaching bedrock.
Soils of Statewide Importance – land
which is deemed suitable for agricultural
production when appropriate management
practices are applied.
For exact definition, see:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/7/657.5
25
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
prime soils and their associated soil health, the county loses the
ability to retain more water in the soil, sequester carbon, retain
and cycle nutrients, and detoxify harmful chemicals.
The soils of Tompkins County vary considerably in
physical properties and in their suitability for crops and other
uses. The complexity of soils arises from the glaciated
landscape. The glacial topography has resulted in narrow deep
valleys, intervening plateaus and hills (highest elevation 2100
feet). Farming is concentrated in valleys and on plateaus.
Tompkins County soil associations and soil types were
mapped by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in 1965. Soil
associations are mapped on a scale of 1 inch per 2 miles
(1:126,720) and broadly represent the parent source of soil
origin. A soil map is more detailed classifying soils by type at a
scale of 1:20,000 and provides much more specific information
about soil capabilities and limitations generally within a two acre
area.
Ten soil associations are found throughout the county
with the most productive soils in the northern plateau areas. Soil
associations dominated by high lime occur in the northwest and northeastern parts of the county, it is
these areas where crop farming dominates. Medium lime soils occupy transitional areas between high
and low lime soils. The central, north central and southern parts of the county include areas of low lime
soils with a strong fragipan (impervious layer). These areas are least suited to crop farming.
In the Tompkins County prime soils occupy 41,453 acres of land, soils of statewide significance
are found on 127,762 acres and there is an additional 19,428 acres suitable for farming if drained (see
Soils Map). Farming has become increasingly concentrated on the best soils where there is higher
yield potential.
In a study conducted in 2001 to assess the feasibility of a countywide PDR program, priority
areas for farmland protection were identified based on soil type and contiguous farming. These areas
were later included in the County’s 2004 Comprehensive Plan and referred to as Agriculture Resource
Focus Areas (ARFA). Of the 77,295 acres of land in the ARFA, 28% prime soils and 38% soils of
statewide importance are included.
4. Climate Impacts on Tompkins County Farmland
Absent of climate change, variations in the
topography of Tompkins County have a significant
impact on climate, particularly temperature
differences throughout the county. The influence of
Cayuga Lake on climate is greatest in areas close to
the lake shore and in downtown Ithaca where
temperatures may be as much as 10 degrees
warmer than in the surrounding hillsides. In most years, the freeze free season ranges from May 5-20
to September 25-October 15. Annual precipitation totals from 30 to 40 inches.
Chart 1 - 2014 ClimAID Projections for # Days
Over 90°F1
Decade Estimated # of Days
2020s 17 to 21
2050s 26 to 41
2080s 33 to 67
The 2014 National Climate Assessment (NCA), a report produced by a 60-member Federal
Advisory Committee with guidance from more than 300 experts, noted that in the Northeastern United
States between 1895 and 2011 temperatures rose by almost two degrees Fahrenheit. The report also
1111
1 Based on middle range climate/emissions scenario for Region 3 (Elmira) -2014 ClimAID Update
26
Tom pkins County
Agricultural Sols
~
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
noted that in the same time period precipitation increased by approximately five inches, or 10%. “The
Northeast has experienced a greater recent increase in extreme precipitation than any other region in
the United States; between 1958 and 2010, the Northeast saw more than a 70% increase in the
amount of precipitation falling in very heavy events (defined as the heaviest 1% of all daily events).” A
more regional resource, NYSERDA’s ClimAID Report, notes “climate change is extremely likely to
bring higher temperatures to New York State, heat waves are very likely to become more frequent,
more intense, and longer in duration. Total annual precipitation will most likely not increase, but occur
as more frequent intense rainstorms. Summer droughts could increase in frequency, intensity, and
duration, especially as the century progresses. Meanwhile, there will likely be a reduction in snowpack
and an increase in the length of the growing season.”
In Tompkins County, agriculture is likely to be impacted particularly from the increase in extreme
precipitation events that farms and their surrounding communities need to plan for. The most serious of
these impacts could be the loss of good, productive, topsoil subject to eroding into nearby waterbodies
during periods of heavy rainfall. As notes in the NCA report, “climate disruptions to agricultural
production have increased over the past 40 years and are projected to increase over the next 25 years.
By mid-century and beyond, these impacts will be increasingly negative on most crops and livestock.”
The report further notes that, “ “current loss and degradation of critical agricultural soil and water assets
due to extremes in precipitation will continue to challenge both rainfed and irrigated agriculture unless
innovative conservation methods are implemented.” Best Management Practices (BMPs) which assist
in stabilizing soil and promoting water quality and retention will need to be more widely implemented
and financial support for these measures needs to be increased. Agricultural communities in stream
valleys, such as those in Tompkins County, may face increased risk of flooding from extreme rainfall
events. Updated flood zones and flood plain mapping for purposes of future development is necessary
for climate change adaptation. Communities in flood areas in the City of Ithaca and adjacent to major
creeks and tributaries may be less able to cope with extreme rainfall events. Also, many of the rural
areas of Tompkins County that utilize well water may struggle with water supply issues during future
droughts. This also has an impact on livestock farms.
Aquatic health, habitat, and ecosystems and their host natural areas are likely to be disrupted
as a result of even slight temperature increases. In the ClimAID Report an increase in days over 90°F
is likely to most impact the local agricultural (Chart 1). Certainly opportunities may result with an
increase in warmth, though extremes would likely strain some industries more than others. As an
example, heat stress on dairy cows and other farm animals is likely, impacting local agriculture. At the
same time, the rural economy may be adversely impacted by reduction in maple syrup production and
reduced winter recreation opportunities.
The farm community is on the “front lines” of the changing climate they, and the agencies that
support them, will need to adapt practices to limit risks and take advantage of new opportunities. Those
practices should be clearly communicated between farms and agencies to help the region survive, and
potentially thrive in this new reality.
6.Invasive and Pest Species
Local deer populations continue to threaten forest regeneration and inflict damage to agronomic
and horticultural crops. Deer are a particularly distinct problem in all agricultural areas of the County, as
well as in the urban and suburban areas. Vegetable, fruit and ornamental crops are most vulnerable to
damage. Fencing has become a major cost for these crop producers.
The economic impact of pests and invasive species on agriculture is likely to be significant.
Fortunately, there is active monitoring and ongoing research when a new invasive pest is found that is
a threat to agriculture or other parts of our environment. As with all invading species, there can be
significant disruption of ecosystems and crop losses before a solution is found that minimizes or
manages the problem. Farmers must however remain vigilant in protecting crops and livestock and will
have to bear additional costs of crop scouting and pest management.
27
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
7. Sustainable Farming Practices
Farmers rely on the soil as the basis of their farming
operations. It is vital to their businesses that both the soil and
the environmental resources on their farms are regenerative
by replacing nutrients, eliminating erosion, and protecting
water supplies. Farmers are keenly tied to the land knowing
which fields are better drained and which take a while to drain.
The intimate relationship between farmers and the land is part
of what defines a farmer as a steward of the land.
Since the 1970’s, there has been increasing
environmental consciousness along with government
programs to encourage conservation and sustainable farming
practices. Some of the notable changes in Tompkins County
that have had a positive impact on farming and land use
include:
Fewer acres in row crop production: there has been a
decline in acres of crops in general as farm numbers have
declined and yields per acre have increased
Switch to grazing herds - in the 1990’s many dairy
farmers switched from feeding year round in the barn to
grazing, reducing the need for harvested feed crops with
the added benefit of reduced manure handling (cows do it)
Nutrient management practices – the increasing
awareness of excess phosphorous in soils and in water
bodies has led to best management practices for manure
application. In addition, dairy herds with over 200 head
are subject to US EPA confined animal feeding regulations
(CAFO) which require that farmers follow a plan that
specifies manure and nutrient management handling practices to reduce application of excess
nutrients and protect water quality. Larger herd sizes and CAFO regulations have resulted in
keeping more farm land in active agriculture production as these dairies require land for crops and
proper manure handling.
Precision technology – this applies to planting, fertilizing and pesticide application. Farm
equipment has enabled farmers to be much more precise in their planting operations reducing the
potential for excess fertilizer or pesticide
Changes in pesticide formulations and improved application technology – as an example,
where once 4 lbs of atrazine might have been applied per acre, now only 1 lbs is needed; low
volume spray equipment enables farmers to use less water reducing runoff potential
Cost of inputs – farmers constantly find themselves in a cost-price squeeze, meaning that input
supplies are increasing at a rate higher than prices and returns for products. Some will simply say
that chemicals, in particular pesticides are too expensive to use liberally.
Organic farming – Over 16,000 acres of land are managed under organic certification or organic
practices. This includes both harvested crop land and land that is used for grazing. Most of the
county’s organic land is associated with 7 organic dairies including land they own or rent.
Hay farming and pasture – hayland and pasture are dominant feed crops for livestock raised on
county farms, these crops require very little inputs in the way of fertilizer or pesticides; Lime and
fertilizer may be applied in spring to grass hay; most hay is planted with alfalfa there for does not
require fertilization. Weeds may be controlled at planting or if a field becomes weedy, but generally
weed growth is manage through proper cutting management so as to avoid the need or pesticides.
Protecting and Enhancing the Environment
Practices and infrastructure on farms that
reduce or mitigate source and non-point
source pollution since the late 1990’s.
(Compiled from Tompkins County Soil and
Water Conservation District records)
#
Practice/Infrastructure Farms
Nutrient management 2
Manure storage systems 7
Milk house waste systems 18
Silage leachate treatment systems 9
Barnyard water runoff control systems 31
Fuel spill prevention systems 9
Alternative watering systems 24
Buffer systems for nearby water
courses 6
Conservation Reserve Enhancement
Program (CREP) 19
Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) 42
Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) 1
Prescribed grazing (fencing, water,
laneways) 76
Waste transfer lines 2
Heavy use area protection 18
Access road 5
Steam crossing 2
Bedding recovery 1
Compost facility 1
Water and sediment collection 1
Best Management Practices (BMP) 8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
28
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
While hay and grass may have some pest problems, farmers generally do not use fungicides or
insecticides on these crops.
Rotational grazing practices – keeps grass healthy and allows it to recover faster from grazing,
healthy grass does not require fertilization as it will rebound on its own from less intense grazing
pressure
Crop rotation – a common practice is to follow several years of row crops with a legume hay crop
to build the soil nutrients and increase soil tilth
Strip cropping – a common practice on sloping fields that minimizes erosion alternating row crops
with hay crops across the slope of a hill
Grassland buffers near waterways to protect from soil erosion and nutrient/chemical runoff
Practices that minimize runoff and water pollution include: manure storage systems, milk
house waste treatment, silage leachate treatment systems, barnyard water runoff control, fuel spill
prevention systems – these practices require sophisticated engineering to ensure their proper
functioning and may be paid for in part by USDA NRCS EQIP funds awarded to farms.
The above practices are evidence that farmers in our county have and are adopting technologies
that protect the environment and making substantial investments in their farming operations to do so.
While a thorough review of the changes in farming practices has not been made, it is safe to say, on
the whole, farms are better managed and prepared to reduce pollution and protect soil and water.
Given interest in how farming is practiced, it is important to raise public awareness of sustainable
farming practices through tours, workshops and media articles. A more thorough review of the impact
of farming on the environment would also document improvements made and opportunities for further
emphasis.
•
•
•
•
•
29
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Farm Profile: Scheffler’s Dairy Farm
Ed and Eileen Scheffler
The Schefflers are third generation dairy
farmers in Groton, and Ed and Eileen have
milked 45 cows since 1981.
Over the years Ed and Eileen have
improved their operation and practices. They
transitioned from corn silage to hay silage and
then to Ag Bags, to improve cow forage quality
and production rather than expand the herd.
Scheffler farm has always grazed their herd;
cows to eat the grass and leave their manure
behind as fertilizer. They have modified this
practice over the years: they now grow grass and
white clover, and the cows are moved every 12
hours rather than every couple of days. The cows
are on pasture May 1st though the end of
October.
Schefflers work 370 acres with one part
time person and some spring tractor help. They
use 80 acres for pasture; and on the rest they
grow crops, including sunflowers. They press the
sunflower seeds for oil, feeding the meal to the
herd and using the oil in their diesel equipment.
Ed and Eileen began transitioning to organic
production in 2000 and shipped their first certified
organic milk in 2003.
The Schefflers have a permit to sell raw milk
from the farm, which they do on a limited basis.
They also raise organic beef, and sell all cuts of
meat, as well as various sausages, direct from
the farm.
D. Agriculture Sectors Overview
Agriculture in Tompkins County can be categorized into
distinct sectors, although many operations, including some
dairy farms, have second and even third enterprises. For
example, a livestock farm might also grow and sell hay, a crop
farm might also raise livestock, or a dairy farm might sell beef.
There is typically one enterprise that dominates, however, and
that is the enterprise used to assign a farm to a given sector.
While there are common themes which apply to all sectors,
individual sectors have unique strengths, production and
marketing strategies, and challenges. Some common themes
include:
constantly changing regulations that increase the cost of
doing business, especially for small farmers
rising input prices while the prices farmers receive for
products do not rise at the same rate making it challenging
to keep up with costs
demand for land: finding suitable land to buy or rent;
increasing land prices and taxes
local zoning regulations that are making farm
operation/expansion more challenging/costly
labor: challenges finding quality labor; seasonal demands;
immigration laws
local markets: increasing competition; growing markets to
absorb growing supply
consumer awareness of farms, farming practices, local
purchasing opportunities
The Sector Profiles that follow describe some of the unique
needs of the most common farming enterprises in the county.
Broadly speaking, the following enterprises characterize the
makeup of Tompkins County agriculture.
Dairy and Field Crops
Dairy and field crops farms occupy the most land and
generate the most sales, and are generally full time enterprises
providing both full and part-time employment. They tend to be
very technology-centered, investing in new equipment and
trialing new crops and practices to remain competitive. What is unique about the Tompkins County
dairy and field crop sectors is there is a significant number, and size diversity, of organic dairies and
certified organic crop acres.
Dairy farms range in herd size: less than 50 cows; 50-99, 100-299, 300-699, 700-999, over
1000. There are at least a dozen dairy farms that have grown significantly, through the acquisition of
land and livestock, some doubling herd size in the past 5 years. There are also at least a dozen dairy
and field crops operations located outside the county that own or are leasing land in this County for
crop production. Due to farm expansion within and on county’s borders, land prices and rental rates
paid by larger operations exceeds what many smaller county farmers can afford. The increasing
competition for agricultural land is reflected in property tax assessment; in 2012 the assessed value of
agricultural land doubled in all parts of the county owing largely to higher prices paid for farmland.
Field crop operations (including corn, soybeans, small grains, alfalfa, and grass hay) range in
size with full-time producers working from 500-2000 acres. These operations have also grown in size
significantly in recent years, adding to the competition for land.
30
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Farm Profile:Laughing Goat Fiber Farm Local Foods Production: Livestock with Pasture and Hay Lisa Ferguson These operations include former dairy farms that
continue to harvest hay and raise livestock, most often beef Lisa Ferguson and her husband, Gary,
moved to Ithaca from Ohio in 2000, purchasingcattle, in the existing pastures. There is also an increase in just under 50 acres in the Town of Ithaca. She production of pork, lamb, goat, meat rabbit and small scale had grown organic vegetables in Ohio, but poultry production including chickens, turkeys and ducks due to wanted to try something with a longer shelf life
the growing interest in locally raised meat. Most of these are here. That, and her interest in fibers and knitting,
put her on the path to raising fiber goats and part-time operations with total sales below $40,000. Most are other fiber livestock. Early on, she sold natural not certified organic but use very few synthetic chemical inputs yarns from her animals, then began to dye and other than fertilizer. Most livestock are raised on pasture without work with it (knitting, weaving) to meet market growth hormones, and antibiotics are only used when needed.demand. Before long she was working a
manufacturer to process the dyed yarn for her,
producing knit products much faster than she Local Foods Production: Market Growers could manage independently. The knit goods are This is a strong agricultural sector fueled by increasing then sold out of the farm, at various festivals and consumer demands for locally-produced foods. It includes all craft shows, and online. In addition to knit goods,
products raised for human consumption, with vegetables leading
livestock for breeding and consumption are also
sold. in acreage and producer numbers, followed by livestock and Currently the farm herd runs between 75 poultry, then fruit and specialty products. and 100 animals, which are primarily angora and Based on sales data gathered by Cooperative Extension, cashmere goats along with a handful of alpaca. the estimated value of local foods sold to and consumed by area Lisa manages the operation with the help of her
residents is at $20 million; this is 10% of all food sold ($200 husband, a few volunteers, and college interns.
In the future, Lisa plans to expand intomillion). 20% of fruits and vegetables consumed by County sheep, as well as build a new barn and some residents come from local farms and 1.8% of local beef is from guest cottages. She and Gary would like the local sources. These numbers are considerably higher than farm to an agritourism destination for people
national statistics from the USDA Agriculture Census data wanting to learn about fiber craft and how to knit
and weave. where only 2% of agriculture sales are categorized as being
sold for human consumption.
Growing interest in local foods has led to a competitive
marketing environment for both existing and startup farms.
Some established farms report sales leveling off with increasing
numbers of farms offering similar products and marketing
approaches. Many want to sell at the Ithaca Farmers Market,
assuming sales will be higher; however, startup farms find it
hard to get noticed among the well-established farms selling
there on weekends. Weekday Ithaca and rural market sales are
much lower in general than the established Weekend Ithaca
Farmers Market.
There are 31 County farms that sell to local consumers, and at least another 50 beyond our
borders but within a 30-mile radius of Ithaca (required for selling at the Ithaca Market) that depend on
Tompkins County outlets and consumers for product sales. Many farmers are expanding their season
through high tunnel production and year round marketing. This has helped to stabilize farm income for
some market growers.
A challenge for small scale farms is to balance prices consumers can pay with production costs.
Local foods are generally higher-priced, in part because of higher labor inputs relative to
mechanization. If farmers could grow and specialize, consumer prices would be more affordable
throughout the year.
Many small local food producers start out with little capital but as they generate sales, returns
are reinvested to acquire equipment and essential infrastructure like deer fencing, a water source for
irrigation, farm equipment, and coolers.
Some efforts are needed to for this sector to grow. Very few farmers have seriously analyzed
their business and considered options for increasing sales, or have outside financing which could help
grow beyond current levels. There is a need for collaboration and coordination to expand into wholesale
31
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
markets. Demand for local foods will depend on growing the consumer base and that will depend on
convenience and price.
Local Foods Production: Specialty Enterprises
There is an ever-expanding array of agricultural products that are being offered for local sales.
Traditional specialty products include maple syrup and honey. Newly available products include
mushrooms, herbal edibles and medicinals, greenhouse grown tropical crops like ginger, figs, and
berries, aquaponic fish, hydroponically grown greens, local grains, and local hops.
Organic Agriculture
Organic agriculture has a long tradition in Tompkins County, starting with small farms involved
in the back to the land movement of the early 1970’s. Many of these farms were involved in starting the
Ithaca Farmers Market in 1973. This is around the time that the organic movement began and the start
of the NY Organic Farming and Gardening Association was founded. For many years, organic farming
was mostly practiced by vegetable farmers growing for the local market.
Today, most of the local farmers raising produce for local sales are farming using organic
methods, though not all are certified, mostly due to the cost and records required and because their
customers do not require certification.
Since 2000 there has been a significant increase in organic field crops and dairy farms. In
Tompkins County, these farms operate at least 10,000 acres of certified organic cropland. These farms
have benefitted from higher prices and growing demand. In the case of the dairy farms, all were
conventional farms that converted to organic production. The field crop producers include mostly new
startups. The growth of organic dairies has resulted in demand for organic crop production and in
facilities able to raise heifers using organic practices.
Organic Production (Data from the Agriculture Census)
Farms with Organic Production
Tompkins County, 2002-2012
Value of Certified Organically
Produced Commodities
Tompkins County, 2002-2012
As happens with the Agriculture Census from time to time, the way and type of data collected has
changed for Organic Production. In 2002, only acreage of certified organic crops was collected (not
livestock or poultry or livestock or poultry products). In 2007, data collection expanded to include to the
new National Organic Production standards (NOP) and included crops, nursery and greenhouse crops,
livestock, poultry, livestock and poultry products; however, the USDA did not check for organic
certification, and commodities were combined into one question. Then in 2012, the USDA’s NOP
standards were used. Crops, livestock and poultry products were reported individually. Data was also
collected about USDA NOP certification, exempt organically produced commodities, and farms
transitioning to NOP certification.
41 $5,263,000
2002 2007 2012 2002 2007 2012
32
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
We know that organic production expanded overall in Tompkins County from 2002 to 2007.
Based on the data, we added 24 crop farms, and started counting 11 organic livestock and poultry
products (11 farms). Some of the 24 new organic crops farms likely existed in 2002, but were not
certified. Perhaps close to 20 of these farms remained NOP uncertified, as an explanation for why the
USDA numbers suggest Tompkins County lost 22 organic farms from 2007 to 2012. From farm data
collected by CCE-Tompkins, we know that there are over 30 organic farms in the county, most of them
certified. Additionally there are dozens of livestock farms using organic practices with incomes under
the $5000 minimum required for NOP certification or who chose not to be certified. This data more
accurately reflects the state of organic agriculture in the county, which we know continues to increase.
Horticultural Enterprises
This is a diverse local sector that is only partially reflected in the USDA Census of Agriculture.
Christmas trees, greenhouse, and nursery operations are counted as part of the census while the
landscape industry is tracked in the US Commerce Census.
There are ten Christmas tree farms, most of whom sell locally but at least three ship trees out of
the area. There are ten greenhouse and nursery growers (census numbers also include vegetables
grown in greenhouses) who retail plants they grow and plants the buy in. Some of the nursery/
greenhouse operations also offer landscape design and installation services. There are four locally
owned full service nursery, retail design, and installation services. [Note: corporate or chain retailers,
such as Home Depot or Lowes, are not included in these data, as none of their products are grown
locally.] Another segment of the horticulture industry is lawn services and landscape gardeners. These
include small one person firms and larger multi-staff businesses. Landscape gardeners often purchase
plants from local nurseries hence adding to the customer base of the growers and retailers. Most
horticultural crops are sold locally at greenhouse/nursery retail locations.
Another unique sector of horticultural crop production is field-grown cut flowers. There is one
large grower (seven acres) that sells flowers from May to November at the Ithaca Farmer’s Market and
to area retail florists. Another not quite as large (two acres) specializes in weddings and parties along
with sales at the Farmers Market. Many vegetable growers also add cut flowers to the mix of what they
grow as the fit nicely into market displays or as a bonus in a CSA share.
Horticultural enterprises generally succeed in communities with a strong economy, meaning
consumers have disposable income for ornamental plants. In Ithaca there has been a long-standing
interest in gardening and hence there are gardeners seeking new plants and plant information.
The institutions that help fuel this interest in plants are the annual Ithaca Spring Garden Fair and
Plant Sale that includes over 40 small growers as well as ten local garden groups selling all kinds of
plants. The event attracts over 3000 people and generates well over $70,000 in plant sales. Cornell
Plantations and the Ithaca Children’s Garden offer horticultural tourism opportunities. Open Days
Garden Tours and unique greenhouse/nurseries add to the area’s draw as a destination for gardeners.
Gardening continues as a strong hobby and area for consumer spending. Beginning in the 1990’s there
was strong demand for perennial plants, recently native plants are in demand and food gardening has
been growing since the start of the local foods movement in early 2000.
Beginning Farmers
While the Agriculture Census suggests the farm community is aging, Cooperative Extension,
and now the Groundswell Center for Local Food and Farming, receive weekly contacts from individuals
interested in farming. Though some established older farmers have no heir apparent, many farms have
younger generations in place working towards ownership.
There has been increasing interest in farming in response to the demand for local foods. There
is a mix of individuals who are seeking to farm, mostly with little or no farming experience. Some are
seeking to homestead (grow their own food) on land they own, while others are serious about
establishing a farm business. Cooperative Extension has a long history of advising beginning farmers
and, since 2009, Groundswell Center has been offering a variety of new farm business training classes.
Over the three years of its existence there has been 36 graduates that have gone on to start farm
businesses.
33
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Key challenges for beginning farmers are identifying profitable niches that are not already filled
by other producers and acquiring farming equipment and suitable land. Very few are seeking financial
services to get started; many start out on a very limited budget, which is a good risk management
strategy during the startup years as they gain experience with production and marketing. Business
development from the point of getting started to generating income is seven years on average. This
transition requires financial assets to start with (savings, family support, an off-farm job); acquisition of
land, infrastructure and equipment; and production and marketing knowledge. Tenacity, hard work, and
good management are essential traits for success.
Beginning farmers associated with family farming operations have added, distinct challenges.
While these individuals have more experience in farming, their key challenges are the cost of
transitioning an established farm business to the next generation. The younger generation in a family
farm operation must slowly acquire the business assets in order to make it financially feasible to
transition the business. Farm transition and estate planning are critical to assisting with these
conversions.
Status of Farm Labor
Historically, Tompkins County has had little, if any, migrant labor, as we don’t have larger fruit
orchards or large mono-crop farms. There may currently be some use of migrant labor on the northern
fringes of the county, where a Cayuga County vegetable crop farmer now owns and rents some land.
For more than a dozen years, many Tompkins County dairy farms have employed
predominantly Mexican and Guatemalan farmworkers to work in their milking parlors. Prior to the
availability of these farmworkers, farmers experienced a chronic problem of attracting and retaining
workers for the parlor.
Dairy farmworkers receive a starting salary at or above minimum wage, and in many cases are
provided housing as well. Many farms also provide weekly or biweekly transportation for shopping and
other errands.
These workers are generally single men; most are in the United States as short-term workers
with the intent to return home. Until recently this has been a self-replacing work force.
According to Mary Jo Dudley of the Cornell Farmworkers Program (CFP), farmworkers
interviewed by the CFP identified issues that need addressing in order to help stabilize the immigrant
dairy workforce. Requests include: having more opportunities to improve their English; increasing the
frequency and quality of communication with farmers; improving housing quality; decreasing social
isolation; and most importantly to have proper work authorization and documentation.
Comprehensive immigration reform has the most potential to provide long term solutions for
immigrant workers; however, the political climate needed to bring about this needed reform has
remained elusive. A more achievable interim goal could be the enactment of the Agricultural Job
Opportunities, Benefits and Security Act (AgJOBS), AgJobs is a proposed immigration law that would
provide agricultural employers with a stable, legal labor force while protecting farmworkers from
exploitative working conditions. The AgJOBS compromise was reached after years of Congressional
and labor-management conflict resulting in tough negotiations between the United Farm Workers
(UFW), major agricultural employers, and key federal legislators.
If enacted, AgJOBS would (1) create an “earned adjustment” program, allowing many
undocumented farmworkers and agricultural guestworkers to obtain temporary immigration status
based on past work experience with the possibility of becoming permanent residents through continued
agricultural work, and (2) revise the existing agricultural guestworker program, known as the “H-2A
temporary foreign agricultural worker program.” (from http://www.immigrationpolicy.org]
34
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
D. Agriculture Sector Profiles: Trends and Challenges
1. Farm Sector Profile - Dairy
Acres
Owned by
Tompkins
County
Dairy
Farms
50%
Acres
Rented by
Tompkins
County
Dairy
Farms
35%
Acres
Owned by
out-of-
County
Dairy
Farms
7%
Acres
Rented by
out-of-
County
Dairy
Farms
4%
Acres
Owned by
Tompkins
County
Heifer
Operations
3%
Acres
Rented by
Tompkins
County
Heifer
Operations
1%
Dairy Chart 1
Conventional, Owned
Conventional, Rented
Organic, Owned
Organic, Rented
Dairy Chart 3
Dairy Farms by Estimated Gross Sales
Dairy Chart 2
Dairy Chart 4
Dairy Charts 1-3 Source: 2014 Tompkins
County Agricultural Data Base compiled by
CCE Tompkins
Dairy Chart 4 Source: USDA Census of
Agriculture 2012
Dairy Chart 5 Source: Tompkins County
Agricultural District Surveys and CCE staff
estimates based on type & size of operation
Dairy Chart 5
Conventional & Organic
Dairy and Heifer Acreage
1,862.63,
---5%
$1,000,000-1,499,999
$100,000-199,999
$200,000-499,999
$40,000-99,999
$500,000-749,000
$750,000-999,999
over $1,500,000
under $39,999
-
11iiiiiiii1 2
0
Iii
4
i
5
I 11
11
I
-
8
10
16 -
15 20
35
Dairy Operations by
Acreage Worked
Over 2000 acres
1000-1999 acres
500-999 acres
100-499 acres
under 99 acres
Dairy Herd Inventory
under 49 Cows
50-99 Cows
100-199 Cows
200-499 Cows
500 or more Cows
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Overview: What are the characteristics of the Dairy sector, and why is it successful
Dairy farming is the foundation of agriculture in Tompkins County. Dairy farmers oversee the most land,
produce the highest value product, provide employment opportunities for hundreds of county residents, and
provide buffers and cooperative opportunities for smaller and niche operations. A mix of operations is beneficial,
and seems to “knit” the agricultural landscape together.
Tompkins County dairy farmers produce high quality milk and consistently have the highest per-cow milk
production in the region; 197.5 million pounds annually, with a per-cow average of 19,800 (NY NASS 2010).
There is a mix of types of dairies including large and small, conventional and organic. There are new
operations as well as expanding ones, and examples of cooperation and support. It’s possible to have a small
herd on a rented farm and buy feed from a larger farm; this model offers a great opportunity for young farmers.
Dairy farming is a full-time occupation, often involving family-member teams in the operations. There are also
smaller farms where one or more family members work off-farm. Farms of all sizes have hired help, either part-
time, seasonally, or full-time year around. The generally accepted ratio of workers per number of cows is one
worker for every 45 cows, so it is estimated that over 200 full-time positions are created by Tompkins County
dairy farms.
Dairy farms are predominantly concentrated in Lansing, Groton, and Dryden. However, there are a few
remaining dairy farms in Newfield, Enfield, Ulysses, and Caroline. Organic dairies tend to be smaller, and larger
farms usually employ conventional practices, although there are exceptions. One of the largest organic dairies in
the northeast is located in Tompkins and Cortland Counties.
The proximity of resources like DairyOne, Quality Milk, CCE/Cornell, Cornell Veterinary Clinics, etc. helps to
provide assistance quickly.
Outlook, Trends, and Future Opportunities
Dairy farm numbers have stabilized in recent years, due in part to a consistent and growing demand for milk
proteins (powdered and solids), both nationally and internationally, and also from the State’s Greek Yogurt
industry. Milk prices have remained higher and more stable. This has allowed dairy farmers to pay down debt,
budget and plan more accurately. With greater financial stability, dairy farms are able to purchase or rent more
land to grow more of their own livestock feed and meet their nutrient management plan’s manure-spreading
requirements. This has led to a tightening up of land available for farming, and smaller farms, dairy and otherwise,
are competing for land.
Another way dairy farmers are expanding is by boarding heifer (female) calves out to other farms. Many of
these farms are former dairies, so they have the needed infrastructure (barns and pasture) to raise the heifers.
There are currently seven farms raising heifers for dairy farmers, two of which raise heifers for dairies in adjacent
counties.
Organic operations, including dairies, have returned idle land back into production. Most idle farm land can be
certified for organic production immediately, and, at least initially, there is no competition for it.
Many county dairy farms are getting larger, which is a national trend. Fifteen years ago, there were five dairy
farms working over 1000 acres, and land worked by farmers from other counties was barely noticeable. In 2014,
there are three farms based in this county working over 2000 acres and ten working over 1000 acres. Ten dairy
farms based in adjacent counties work over 5100 acres in seven Tompkins County towns. Of these ten farms,
three work over a total of 2000 acres in support of their operation, and the others work over 1000 acres.
Still, there are plenty of operations that have found their right size, and figure out ways to make it work, such
as diversifying with additional crops, providing custom work for other farms, or transitioning to organic production.
There are currently seven organic dairies in Tompkins County.
Marketing Strategies
Milk is transported by several haulers, including Alnye trucking, Preble Milk, and Cortland Bulk. Some haulers
deliver it directly to the processor, others take it to processing and distribution centers, like Dairy Marketing
Services and Dairy Farmers of America. Processors receiving Tompkins County milk include Upstate Niagara,
Byrne Dairy, Polly-O, and Organic Valley.
All seven organic dairy farms in the county say transitioning to organic production was the best decision they
ever made. Organic dairy farmers consistently earn more per hundredweight of milk over conventional production.
There are, however, noted drawbacks, including: in times of low prices, some processors move to a quota system
and might not purchase all of a farmer’s milk at organic prices, so some ends up in the conventional stream.
The milk pricing formula is complicated, and dairy farmers have little influence over the price they get for fluid
milk. As a result, there is on-going interest in facilities for value-added dairy products. Recently a farmers’
cooperative, including some farmers from Tompkins County, opened a powdered milk processing plant in Auburn
to have more control over the price they receive for their milk.
36
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Direct-to-consumer opportunities are limited due to the licensing requirement and/or needed processing
facilities and equipment; there is one farm in the county licensed to sell raw milk, and two others are selling
farmstead cheese.
Challenges
Labor is a chronic problem for dairies, with farms specifying availability, attraction, and retention as issues.
Many dairy farms in the county employ workers from outside the country, so there are concerns about labor crack
downs and potential labor shortages. Legal issues are also of concern given worker rights watchdogs.
Dairy farmers note that State and Federal Labor laws restricting what farm children can do on farms can be
difficult. In NYS, children age 12-13 are allowed to hand-pick berries on their family farm, and then at 14 and 15
they can get working papers but are prohibited from most mechanized activities (there are exemptions for 4-H’ers,
vocational training programs, and those with tractor safety training). There are restrictions on what children can do
until they are 18. Under age 12, children are not allowed to do any work on a farm, with the exception of feeding
and caring for their own animal(s). Any child 12 or over working on a family farm with a payroll of $3000 or more
annually must include the child on the payroll and pay them at least minimum wage (there is a reduced minimum
wage for children under 16).
Taxes are less of a concern for larger operations, as they are a much smaller percentage of the cost of
production. However, smaller operations feel the pinch, even with agricultural assessment. Lansing farmers
especially cited concerns about the impact on property taxes if AES Cayuga shuts down.
Increasing feed costs are also consistently a concern. At times there are serious shortages of organic feed
crops, and, as a result, some farms have returned to conventional production, although this is not the case in
Tompkins County. Organic producers grow more of their own crops due to these shortages and resulting higher
prices.
External issues of concern to dairy farmers include animal rights activists and environmentalists opposed to
large farms which is often based on misconceptions. Dairy farms with over 300 cows are very heavily regulated,
the details of which are often not well known. Farmers need to find ways to be more visible and accessible to
answer public questions about their operations. Conventional producers are concerned that labels like “organic”
and “BST free” creates consumer perceptions that some products are “better” or “worse”.
Industry Needs: Services and Support
CCE needs to keep Dairy Team positions filled; frequent and prolonged vacancies leave a big hole in
services.
There needs to be a more proactive linking between retiring farmers without an heir and young farmers,
integrating them into the operation to transition into an ownership role.
Competition for land in some areas is too stiff for even the “big guys”. Also, some of these operations that are
being sold have been operating on the fringes for years and the facilities have been neglected beyond repair.
Property price tags are bigger than the value of land and buildings but high selling prices have pushed
assessed values up increasing the tax burden of land ownership.
There are many issues with non-farm neighbors; farmer’s need help telling their stories (video series, farm
tours, farmer profiles in local media, etc.). Also, helping the general public understand what they need to
know when they live near farms, i.e. slow-moving vehicles, dangerous driving around farm equipment (the 3rd
week of April is rural road safety). Is this covered in Drivers’ Ed programs? Can the Real Estate Disclosure
document and explanation process be expanded?
There is a need to work with law enforcement and municipal officials to understand what are normal,
accepted agricultural practices and to-be-expected occurrences when complaints arise, i.e. late night field
work or livestock escaping. Also, municipalities need more interaction with their farm community through
agricultural advisory boards and regular meetings with farmers.
For smaller producers, a system for collective purchasing and a centralized hub for feed and other supplies
would be helpful.
•
•
•
•
•
•
37
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
2. Farm Sector Profile: Field Crops
Field Crops Chart 1
Acres
Acres Rented by
Owned by Out-of-
Out-of-County Crop
County Crop Farmers
Farmers 10%
1%
Acres
Owned by
Tompkins
County Crop Acres
Farmers
42%Tompkins
Rented by
County Crop
Farmers
47%
Field Crops Chart 2
Field Crops Chart 4
$5,827,000
$1,518,000
$8,310,000
$3,915,000
Field Crops Chart 6
Field Crops Chart 3
Crop Farms by Estimated Gross Sales
Field Crops Chart 5
Field Crops Charts 1-3 Source: 2014 Tompkins County Agricultural Data Base compiled by CCE Tompkins
Field Crops Chart 4 & 5 Source: USDA Census of Agriculture 2012
Field Crops Chart 5 Source: Tompkins County Agricultural District Surveys and CCE staff estimates based on type & size of operation
Field Crop Acreage
Acres Owned by Tompkin:
County Crop Farmers
Acres Rented by Tompkin:
County Crop Farmers
Acres Owned by Out-of-
County Crop Farmers
Acres Rented by Out-of-
County Crop Farmers
Conventional and Organic
Field Crops Acreage
2574 .14,
$1,000,000-1,499,999 1
$500,000-999,999 2
$200,000-499,999
100,000-199,999
$50,000-99,999
$10,000-49,999
Below $10,000 6
0 5
Conventional, Owned
■ Conventional, Rented
Organic, Owned
Iii Organic, Rented
11
8
15
24
10 15 20 25 3
38
Crop Operations by
1 Acreage Worked
Over 2000 acres
■ 1000-1999 acres
500-999 acres
100-499 acres
Under 99 acres
5,125 Bushels Harvested by
161,944 Type of Crop
_\ 9,034
I / 102,566 Hay
972,075
■ Grains, Rye
Grains, Wheat
Grains, Buckwheat
Grains, Oats
Grains, Barley
Iii Soybeans
Iii Corn
Field Crop Sales
Iii Corn
Soybeans
Grains
Hay
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Overview: What are the characteristics of the Field Crops Farm Profile: Carpenter Farmsector, and why is it successful Russ and Sarah Carpenter Field crop production is the second largest agricultural Russ and Sarah Carpenter are third economic contributor in the county. Field crops and dairy are generation farmers, working about 500 acres in therelated sectors, in that much of the harvest from crop farms is Towns of Enfield and Ulysses. Russ grew up utilized by local and regional dairy farms, and dairy farms often helping his father on the farm, attended SUNYproduce more crops than they can use and sell the surplus on the Cobleskill and then returned to the farm in the early
commodities market. 1980’s.
Crops are grown throughout the county, although farms that Russ grows approximately 150 acres each of
grow crops exclusively tend to be on the west side of the county in soybeans, corn, and hay, and 50 acres of wheat.
Ulysses, Enfield, and Newfield. Producers predominantly use They have a grain dryer on the farm, which means
Russ can process grains so they are a more readilyconventional methods, although many use no-till, GPS/precision useable commodity. tillage, and other new technologies to reduce erosion and input use. Most of the soybeans are sold on contract They also tend to rent more land than they own, in contrast to dairy before harvest, and shipped either to Canada or farms. There are field crop growers who own little or no farmland the Newark, NJ port for shipment overseas. Most of themselves, and work land around a home base of equipment the corn is brokered through ethanol plants; a lot
storage facilities. goes to Fulton to make NASCAR Fuel. Russ
Nearly half of the crop farmers working in Tompkins County are explains that ethanol production has helped
full-time, working from 500 to over 1000 acres. Crop farming is increase the corn base price in New York State; the
price is often as good as or better than the price set highly mechanized, so a small number of people can handle most by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME). Also, of the tasks. The larger operators tend to hire a few people both Dried Distiller’s Grains (DDG’s), a by-product seasonally, and may have one employee year around. They also of ethanol production, and the meal by-product of tend to have integrated operations, i.e. trucking, grain, equipment, Bio-diesel production are high protein feeds that etc., and work in multiple counties. return to the market as livestock feed. Smaller scale crop farms often produce hay, with a rotation of The Carpenter’s use dried corn at home to
corn when they need to replant fields. Hay is a crop that requires heat their large farm home. They use a self-feeding
fewer inputs, can be handled with older equipment on a part-time furnace and it takes 6-10 tons of corn, which has a
basis, and has a ready market with large and small livestock $2000 value, a year. That’s a 50% savings over
producers throughout the county. Depending on the quality of the their previous heating bills.
hay, someone with 100+ tillable acres would meet the requirements
for agricultural property tax assessment.
Outlook, Trends, and Future Opportunities
Throughout Tompkins County the soil types, rainfall, and
growing days support successful production of a wide range of
crops and crop varieties. There are strong and diverse marketing
opportunities to sell the product grown locally.
Many grain farms are multigenerational, which provides a
history of what works as well as an opportunity for future
generations to move into leadership and ownership roles with more
flexible options. Lower overhead costs allow for flexibility and part-
time operations.
There is a growing trend for small-scale farms to work with
larger-scale neighbors, such as borrowing equipment or having a larger neighbor harvest crops for a share of the
harvest.
Climate change may present new positive opportunities for farmers, such as the potential for double cropping,
i.e. follow wheat with soybeans, or the ability to plant longer-season hybrids which are more likely to have higher
production. However, the possibility of more frequent heavy downpours increase the risk of erosion and crop
washouts, failure to germinate, or reduced rate of growth.
With the increasing value of, and demand for, agricultural land in the county – including previously fallow land
– it is likely viable agricultural land that does not continue in a farm family will be purchased or rented by another
farmer. As smaller farms are absorbed into other operations, the future may be very large farms interspersed with
small niche operations and part-timers.
Marketing Strategies
Field crops grown in Tompkins County are sold locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally. Generally,
the Chicago commodities exchange prices are used to determine prices. Field crops leaving Tompkins County
39
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
are marketed through Perdue Agricultural Commodities Marketing Association (PACMA), Lakeview, Oswego
Ethanol Plant, also Lansing Grain (Michigan) and are typically transported by rail car to eastern sea ports.
Crops that remain local are often bought and sold through an informal network of farms with institutional
awareness of needs and availability from year to year. There are also regional grain storage facilities that buy and
sell crops.
There is some added value production, such as custom feed blending, grain roasting, and/or storage
operations. Some field crops are grown for human consumption, most notably sweet corn, but also a variety of
beans and grains. Tompkins County is also home to Farmer Ground Flour, which is an operation that adds value
to organic grains by grinding them into flour that is sold locally and regionally.
Challenges
Crop farming is a speculative business. Farmers make the best, educated decisions about what to grow,
when to plant, etc., and given enough rain and sunshine at the right times, they will be successful. However, in an
international market place, weather-caused shortages in a large region may not result in higher prices because
crops are likely available elsewhere. At the same time, a world-wide abundance of a crop will depress prices
unexpectedly.
Crop farming is a seasonal occupation, and full-time farmers must produce enough each season to meet
year-around expenses. At certain times in the growing season additional help is needed, but it is often difficult to
find reliable, temporary help.
The increasing costs of production, especially fuel, are challenging for all farmers; additionally, taxes,
equipment, and equipment maintenance account for larger share of producer’s expense.
Access to land is a growing problem. Farmers report increasing competition, and are especially frustrated
when they lose rented land after they’ve made improvements. Parcels are also getting sold out from under current
renters for use by neighboring operations, and there is an increasing amount of land being purchased or rented
by farmers from bordering counties. Adding to this problem is new non-farm land owners having unrealistic
expectations of rental rates; although rents are as high as $75+ an acre in some areas, lack of competition and/or
poorer soil types do not justify high rental rates. Sometimes these new owners have no intention of continuing to
rent their land, or farm it themselves, removing it from the available land base.
Industry Needs: Services and Support
Access to equipment dealers is a problem throughout the County. Smaller equipment dealers may not be able
to get parts so farmers must wait for a part to arrive by mail or go to Cortland for parts. For small-scale
farmers, this delay often means they miss a weather-related window of opportunity.
For new farmers, it can be hard to get into the “network” – existing farmers know who might be looking for
crops, or who might want to buy something, or who has what equipment they might be willing to loan, etc.
These networks are based on familiarity and trust, and it can be difficult for new-comers to find acceptance.
•
•
40
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
3. Farm Sector Profile: Large Animal Livestock (Beef)
Large Animal Livestock Chart 1 Large Animal Livestock Chart 2
Large Animal Livestock Chart 3
Large Animal Livestock Acreage Large Animal Livestock
Operations by Acreage Worked
Large Animal Livestock Farms
by Estimated Gross Sales
Dairy Charts 1 & 2 Source: 2014 Tompkins
County Agricultural Data Base compiled by
CCE Tompkins
Dairy Chart 3 Source: Tompkins County
Agricultural District Surveys and CCE staff
estimates based on type & size of operation
Overview: What are the characteristics of the Large Animal Livestock sector, and why is it successful
There is an expanding customer base for locally-raised, direct-to- consumer meats, and local farms with
enough pasture and crop land interested in raising beef. For those with the land base and livestock husbandry
knowledge, overhead for getting started is relatively low: beef calves are affordable at livestock markets, and a
workable fence can be installed by hand. Rotational grazing provides an excellent system for pasture
management.
Most beef producers are part time, raising an average of xx head per year on pasture and hay they
produce to reduce feed costs and provide more income. These farmers produce grass-fed livestock for the most
part, although many producers supplement the herd’s diet with grain on some basis to improve meat marbling.
The only farms offering certified organic beef in Tompkins County are organic dairy farms which butcher from
their herd to offer beef for sale as an additional income stream. In general pasture land and hay crops require
limited chemical inputs if animals are grazing and manure is spread so the majority of local beef is naturally
raised.
There are two larger specialized livestock farm operations in the county including Genex Breeders bull farm in
Enfield with international sales of bull semen and Glenwood Farms Bison (70 head) that focuses on local sales.
Outlook, Trends, and Future Opportunities
There are many small, multigenerational family farms that are well-suited to move into livestock production, as
at one time they were likely dairy farms and have existing barns, pasture, and fencing infrastructure. They tend to
$100,000-199,999
$40,000,-99,999
$10,000-39,999
Below $10,000
Owned
Rented
0 5 10 15 20
Large Animal
Livestock Farms
by Estimated
Gross Sales
41
■
Iii Under49
11 50-99
100-499
Over500
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
be single owner or single family operations. Raising beef livestock is a good choice for a part-time farmer as it is
far less labor-intensive than dairying. With a good fence, access to water, and plenty of pasture, beef cattle will
generally take care of themselves, allowing the farmers to concentrate on cropping.
With the increasing demand for local products, there is an increasing demand for USDA-certified, and other,
slaughter facilities. Farmers report wait lists that require them to schedule a slaughter date well in advance
(sometimes a year), or needing to travel several hours to find a facility. There is an opportunity for new, custom-
butchering facilities to help meet at least seasonal needs.
Tompkins County soils, topography and pasture resources provide an excellent base for beef production,
especially in the southern half of the county, however, increasing taxes and assessed values may put pressure on
these farmers to sell. There is a slim margin of profit in raising beef with some farmers just able to cover their
property taxes. Some of the land that is or could be utilized for beef production is more vulnerable to
development and could be targeted for conservation easements.
Marketing strategies used by sector:
Many small-scale producers sell live animals, by the half or quarter animal, and then arrange for butchering at
a NYS Custom licensed plant. Buyers have some decision-making ability on certain cuts, sizes, and packaging.
Consumers save money by buying in bulk, and also have some ability to customize the product to best suit their
needs.
Somewhat larger-scale producers that sell at retail outlets must utilize USDA slaughter facilities to process
their animals. Generally they have invested in freezer space to store meat once they get it from the processor
and can then sell it by the cut, either directly at the farm, at farmers markets, or through Community Supported
Agriculture shares. This allows the customer to buy only the cuts they want and provides the producer with the
higher retail price per cut.
Beef and dairy farms of all sizes sell live animals at local and regional livestock markets. Sometimes the price
at the auction is high enough to offset the additional work involved in wholesaling and retailing their product.
Challenges
The price of livestock feeds (hay, grain) has doubled in recent years; farmers need to develop an
understanding the global markets involved in growing crops and animals here.
This region is blessed with an abundance of water, but it’s often not in right place to access it on livestock
farm. There are State and Federal programs to assist with water development and fencing to keep livestock out of
streams, but o funding is competitive and smaller farms applicants do not rank highly. There is also a problem
with runoff being diverted to farmland from nearby non-farm development, resulting in new wet areas in fields.
Farmland has become fragmented in many areas of the county, with residential housing interspersed. This
often results in complaints from or disagreements with non-farm neighbors, about things like escaped or noisy
livestock, the smell of manure, etc.
Increasing taxes and unreasonably restrictive municipal laws take their toll on farm finances and farmer’s
ability to work efficiently. It can take a lot of time and money to try and resolve a conflict with or adhere to certain
local laws. Some farmers report feeling intimidated by the potential negative interaction with municipalities: when
they are leaving you alone, you don’t want to speak up about a problem or make waves, so problems are not
addressed.
Agriculture is typically left out of emergency planning, but has the potential to be impacted by the
consequences of unexpected catastrophes. Farms may have generators that need to be refueled after a few
days, and livestock feed supplies may be exhausted.
Finding farm land to buy is challenging; there may be willing sellers, but they are complacent about holding on
to their land. In some parts of the county, the competition for farmland is so strong that a start-up farm can’t
compete. In some locations, farmers can’t find land for pasture to rent or buy; if they can’t expand, they may go
out of business.
Industry Needs: Services and Support
Many farms have land that is bisected by roads; livestock farmers that straddle busy State and County roads
need large culverts to cross livestock under roads.
Livestock farms that buy-in all or part of their feed would benefit from a Local Feed Exchange to facilitate
information exchange (post prices paid, suppliers of available feed, quantifies and price, et.) and to facilitate
bulk purchases.
•
•
42
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
4. Farm Sector Profile: Small Animal Livestock
Small Animal Livestock Operations
by Acreage Worked
Small Animal Livestock Chart 1 Small Animal Livestock Chart 2
Small Animal Livestock Chart 3 Small Animal Livestock Chart 4
Small Animal Livestock Farms
by Gross Sales
Small Animal Livestock Charts 1-3 Source: 2014 Tompkins County Agricultural Data Base compiled by CCE Tompkins
Small Animal Livestock 4 Source: Tompkins County Agricultural District Surveys and CCE staff estimates based on type &
size of operation
Overview: What are the characteristics of the Small Animal Livestock sector, and why is it successful
Small livestock producers including sheep, goats, pigs, poultry, and fiber animals, often work with heritage or
unusual breeds, chosen for unique characteristics that the farmers believe are the best fit for their operations. The
animal’s uniqueness helps create a niche market for the products, such as heritage pork, blue and green-shelled
eggs, and Angora goat fiber. Many livestock in this category are also both sources of meat and producers or
another product: chicks and eggs, sheep and wool, etc. In the case of sheep, goats, and alpaca, fiber can be sold
as a fleece, felted, or spun into yarn, that are further increased in value through knitting, crocheting, or weaving.
Most small livestock producers are part-time, with proceeds from the operation covering cost and perhaps
providing a small supplemental income. They tend to be family operations, and sometimes children have major
responsibilities in caring for the livestock.
The smaller the livestock and size of herd or flock, the less farm land is needed. Many rely on pasture land
for grazing and buy in some supplemental grains. They may not own equipment for crop production or hay
Small Animal Livestock
Acreage
Owned
11 Rented
Small Livestock Operations
by Livestock Type
Poultry
■Sheep
Goats
Alpaca
Pork
$40,000-99 ,999
$10,000-39,999
Below $10,000
43
0 10
Under20
20-49
Iii 50-99
II over 100
20
■ Small Animal
Livestock
Farms by
Gross Sales
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
making so they rely on other local producers of hay and grains and as such provide a growing market for local
producers of hay, primarily, as well as some grains.
Outlook, Trends, and Future Opportunities
Given demand for local food and farm products, there is a growing market for locally raised poultry, pigs,
lamb, sheep and goat milk cheese or yogurt, and fiber. Small animals are a less expensive and space intensive
way for new comers to get involved in animal agriculture. There is also a strong network of area producers and
homesteaders that provide mentoring, informal cooperation and support. The trend toward direct marketing is
likely to continue and grow, offering part-time farmers the opportunity to expand to full-time. There is also room for
more producers, providing there is affordable land available.
There are producers who began as 4-H members and have grown into a viable business. Small animals offer
opportunities for youth interested in a career in agriculture to gain experience and build a small flock or herd,
which can direct college and career interests. There is a segment of small animal livestock producers who are
retired or near retirement age, and have the time to explore and develop markets and find their niche. As they
retire from this enterprise, their existing operations or markets can transition to another producer.
Marketing Strategies
Most small livestock producers are using a variety of direct marketing methods to sell their products including
direct sales via their farms, sales via are farmers markets, partnerships with CSA’s to offer their products to CSA
customers, and other such schemes. Value-added production is an important component of small livestock
production, including cheese, fleeces, wool, etc. Fiber products may be sold on line or at area craft shops and
festivals.
There is increasing interest in locally-raised meat and poultry. Lamb and kids offer smaller and more
manageable freezer cuts than beef or bison.
Many of the heritage or unusual breeds raised on local farms are marketed to other producers starting to grow
their flock/herd thus providing an outlet for surplus animals.
Challenges
Goat producers find a more limited market for meat than lamb.
Theft, trespass, and vandalism are reported on many farms, as well as uninformed neighbor complaints
causing undue stress and time and money loss. Some farmers also mentioned concerns about animal rights
activist activities.
Small-scale producers lack the income to afford hay-making equipment, so they can’t produce their own crop
even if they have the land available.
Droughts will make it difficult keeping up with pasture rotation during a drought, and climate change makes
planning for forage and feed more challenging.
Industry Needs: Services and Support
There is a need for more vets knowledgeable about small ruminants. This could be exacerbated by possible
legislation limiting access to farmer-administered animal antibiotics.
The feed supply infrastructure is challenging: farmers report being able to get only hay, corn, and soybeans
nearby and have to travel for the rest. There is a need for more options for local and/or organic grain feed
rations. During hay shortages, small livestock producers seem to come up short and needing to go out-of-
county or region to find what they need.
There is a shortage of slaughter facilities and limited access to those that exist. Higher fuel prices make travel
to processors more expensive.
There is a need identification of farms like a county farm signage to raise awareness of agriculture and its
contributions.
•
•
•
•
44
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
5. Farm Sector Profile: Equine
Equine Chart 1 Equine Chart 2
Equine Charts 1-2 Source: 2014 Tompkins
County Agricultural Data Base compiled by
CCE Tompkins
Equine Chart 3 Source: Tompkins County
Agricultural District Surveys and CCE staff
estimates based on type & size of operation
Equine Chart 3
Overview: What are the characteristics of the Equine sector, and why is it successful
Equine is growing agricultural sector with about two thirds of the operations being eligible for agricultural
assessment (sales over $10,000 per year), most with without a secondary enterprise. About a third of the equine
operations are stables offering boarding training, and riding lessons. The rest of the sector members are
breeders, polo enthusiasts, and equine rescue and rehabilitation. A majority of the equine operations are owned
by women.
About half of the equine operations provide a full-time income, and most, if not all, of the stables provide
employment, from part time to full time for several people other than the owner.
Many poor soil types which do not support crop production are suitable for pasture. Equine operations can
find suitable land throughout the county that is less attractive to crop and dairy producers. However, they do
depend on other producers in the county to supply quality horse hay resulting in an attractive market for smaller
part time landowners with access to hay land and equipment.
Equine Acreage
141.99
Rented
Owned
Equine Operations by Estimated Gross
Sales
$100,000-199,999
$40,000-99,999
$10,000,-39,999
Below $10,000
0 5 10 15
■ Equine
Operations by
Estimated
Gross Sales
45
Equine Operations by
Acreage Worked
Under29
30-79
80-199
Iii 200-500
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Outlook, Trends, and Future Opportunities
Many equine operations are small and use off farm income to
acquire and grow their farm operations to avoid debt. Some have
investors, to build needed facilities, (stables, riding barns, pastures,
rinks, etc.). These are the larger facilities in the county which offer
boarding, training, and riding lessons.
There is pasture land available in this county and support
industries nearby (Cornell large animal clinic), so equine operations
have a good base for starting a business.
The equine industry has several related sectors, such as custom,
high-end saddle and tack and manufacturers, tack repairers, and
farriers that can be found in the county. County equine operations also
purchase a lot of the hay produced in the county, providing a relatively
new and growing market for these producers.
Boarding, training and riding facilities are dependent on a
population with disposable income; equestrian pursuits are an
expensive hobby.
Marketing Strategies
Much of the marketing in the equine sector involves the sale of
services: the boarding of horse for owners without sufficient land for
keeping a horse, riding boarded horses when the owner can’t do so
consistently, and training horses for owners. Equine operations also
train horses that they subsequently sell to recreational and
competitive-riding owners.
There is a strong youth component to training for competitive
riding, again, mostly female. These girls and young women own or rent
a horse stables at a training facility, and are often part of a stable team
that competes regionally.
With the growing interest in equestrian pursuits, support
businesses have come to the county. There are several high-end tack
and saddle makers, as well as feed businesses that specialize in
horse feed.
Challenges
Some equine operations do not raise crops or sell enough
livestock or services to meet the criteria for agricultural property tax
assessment, yet they often own substantial acreage. This means they
have a heavy tax burden.
Stock is expensive, and stud fees are high; this sometimes leads
to indiscriminate breeding.
NY Fees are extremely high compared with neighboring states;
many livestock haulers often register their trailers in Maine, with is far
cheaper.
[Equine Profile]
Unreasonably restrictive local laws and/or ill-informed application thereof to new farm construction.
Industry Needs: Services and Support
facilities for humane disposal of old horses and rendering
supply lists
trailer costs
•
•
•
46
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
6. Farm Sector Profile: Market Growers
Market Grower Chart 1 Market Grower Chart 2
Market Grower Chart 3 Market Grower Chart 4
Market Grower Charts 1-3 Source: 2014 Tompkins County Agricultural Data Base compiled by CCE Tompkins. Market Grower
Chart 4 Source: Tompkins County Agricultural District Surveys and CCE staff estimates based on type & size of operation
Overview: What are the characteristics of the Market Grower sector, and why is it successful
For the purpose of this profile, Market Growers are defined as those producing berries, tree fruit, and
vegetables that are primarily marketed direct to consumers and local buyers. Market growers vary in size from a
few acres to 200 acres at most. Vegetable growers require additional land for cover crops and crop rotation to
maintain soil fertility and reduce pest problems.
Berry crops grown include: strawberries, brambles, and blueberries. Grapes are a minor crop associated
with wine production (4 farms). Apples are the dominant tree fruit; however cherries, apricots, peaches and plums
are being grown with variable annual yields depending on spring temperatures that may impact blossom and
pollination. A full variety of vegetable crops are being grown to exploit the growing season. Some growers may
produce over 30 different varieties of crops on their farms starting in spring with greens through year end root and
storage crops. High tunnels are being used for year round production of greens. Storage crops including root
crops, onions and squash are sold year round.
Acres in Production
4% Flowers, 4 farms
11 Fruit, 3 farms
Vegetable, 18 farms
Iii Orchard, 4 farms
Vineyard, 2 farms
Market Grower Acres and
Operations by Production
Methods
Conventional, 13
farms
■ Organic, 18 farms
47
Market Grower Operations by
Acreage Worked
Iii Under 20
■20-49
11 50-99
Iii 100-199
Over 200
Market Grower Estimated Gross
Sales
16 ~--1_5 _____ _
14 +---
12 +----
10 +----
8 +---
6 +--~-
4
2
0
II Market Grower
Estimated Gross
Sales
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Farm Profile: Stick and Stone Farm
Lucy Garrison and Chaw Chang
Lucy Garrison and Chaw Chang moved
their organic produce operation from Newfield to
Trumansburg in 2000 and began expanding;
they now work about 72 acres and produce a
wide variety of produce as well as eggs. The
farm has five full-time, year-round employees,
and they add two more full-time workers and
eight part-time workers over the summer months.
Stick and Stone sells produce to
restaurants, through a U-Pick, at farmers
markets, and through 450 Full Plate Collective
CSA (community Supported Agriculture) shares.
Full Plate Collective is Stick and Stone Farm,
Remembrance Farm and Three Swallow Farm.
Lucy and Chaw attribute their success to
adapting to market needs and expanding slowly.
For example, when green beans became popular
among local restaurants, they invested in a
green bean harvester to meet the demand. They
have expanded into fruit trees to meet the
demands of CSA members.
Although they are young, Lucy and Chaw’s
children are engaged in the farm operation and
have shown interest in learning more and having
more responsibility. Lucy and Chaw hope to pass
the business on to their children one day.
Lucy and Chaw work to find new ways to
expand production and create an ever-growing
market. Their goal is for the farm to be
sustainable and for the people farming here to be
happy.
There is a mix of experienced growers and new producers.
Most experienced growers are generating a full time living from
farming and use a variety of marketing channels. Newer producers
need to be innovative to find niches that are not filled. The marketing
environment for market growers is becoming increasingly
competitive. The sector is largely successful because there is access
to a receptive community of consumers that shop at farmers markets,
join CSA’s, visit farm stands and pick your own farms. In addition,
local retailers and restaurants buy from local farmers and feature
local products in stores and menus.
Outlook, Trends, and Future Opportunities
Expansion of this sector has been steady for over 40 years
starting with the establishment and evolution of the Ithaca Farmers
Market in 1973, the emergence of CSA’s as a marketing strategy in
the 1990’s, and the growth of the local foods movement that has
gained significant momentum since 2000. Ithaca and Tompkins
County has gained a foodie town reputation, hence making it
attractive to new market farm startups. Increasingly, new farmers are
finding marketing to be a challenge. Some have succeeded by
specializing in what they grow or how they market. Others are
foundering generating minimal returns for their efforts, and when
coupled with production challenges and other time demands, many
will not succeed. Support for new farmers is being provided by
Cooperative Extension and Groundswell Center for Local Food and
Farming, by offering business planning training and marketing
guidance.
Opportunities exist to grow the local food system, but it will
require more consumers to buy local, more buyers to buy local, and
farmers will need to be more strategic in their business and marketing
efforts. Areas from expansion include: pick your own, increased year
round production and storage capacity, added value processed fruits
and vegetables, a wholesale farmers market, culinary and agritourism
expansion, cooperative marketing and shipping to regional outlets.
Marketing Strategies
Nearly all of the market growers in the county are engaged in
direct marketing. Channels being used include a network of ten
farmers’ markets throughout the county, over 30 CSA farms, five Pick
Your Own (PYO) farms, sales to 28 area restaurants, and sales to
three primary retailers (Greenstar, Wegman’s, P&C Fresh). Farm
stands include one that features solely their own farm grown produce,
and six others that grow some products and buy the balance from the produce auction in Penn Yan or the
Syracuse Regional Market. Institutional sales are limited primarily because prices received in other channels are
higher. However, some institutions (Cayuga Medical Center, Cornell Greek System, for example) do buy local or
regional products via distributors including Regional Access, Cortland Produce and Maines. Regional Access is a
key player in the local food scene, providing shipping services for farmers to local outlets and to NYC stores used
by a few area farmers.
Most farmers use a mix of marketing channels to spread their risk. All are time and resource challenged
making it hard to explore new marketing options. Cooperative Extension has been hosting annual farmer-buyer
networking meetings where producers can meet buyers and learn about their needs. Additionally, CCE has been
conducting market channel assessments for producers that allows then to evaluate returns by channel. This has
helped growers be more strategic in deciding whether to stay with a particular channel or not.
Challenges
Direct marketing
Market saturation, need to grow the market and get more customers to buy local
Customer education: varieties/crops, production methods, where/why buy local
.-----~
•
48
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Pricing at markets is too high for some people
Ithaca Farmers Market (IFM) is doing well, but smaller markets are struggling, working with smaller markets
on advertising and promotion
Good locations for small, community markets, in proximity to other attractions; encourage CSA pick-ups at
small farmers markets
Rental rates for farmers market stalls; obtaining a farmers market stall/space
Change in characteristics of customer: used to come to pick for storage, now come to pick for fun
Farmers lack of understanding of what makes good customer service
Wholesale
Small size of local farms relative to wholesale buyer volume needs
Consistent supply and quality
Pricing
GAPs (Good Ag Practices) certification required by wholesalers
Lack of facilities and equipment for proper post-harvest handling: washing, grading, packing and distribution
Lack of labor or equipment for large scale field harvest
Industry Needs: Services and Support
Consumer education about where/what/how to buy local and how to cook with fresh produce
Farmer education: production, packing, professional business practices and marketing
Farmer buyer connections
Infrastructure: storage facility for fall harvest
Infrastructure: freezer facility
Infrastructure: canning/processing facility
High tunnels for extended season production
On farm cold storage options: root cellars, coolers, barns
Produce washing/packing that meets GAPS certification
Labor
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
49
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
7. Farm Sector Profile: Ornamental Horticulture
Horticulture Chart 1 Horticulture Chart 2
Source: 2014
Tompkins County Agricultural Data
Base compiled by CCE Tompkins
Source: Tompkins
County Agricultural District Surveys
and CCE staff estimates based on type
& size of operation
Horticulture Chart 2
Overview: what are the characteristics of the Ornamental Horticulture sector, and why is it successful
The Ornamental Horticulture sector in Tompkins County includes retail garden centers,
nursery/greenhouse producers, and small vegetable growers that include production and/or sales of ornamental
plants as part of a larger farm operation. Nursery/greenhouse crops produced include annuals, perennials,
ornamental trees and shrubs, native plants, and fruit trees.
Retail garden centers and nurseries in Tompkins County employ approximately 150 year-round
employees with an additional 100 seasonal employees. The number of people employed by landscapers,
arborists and lawn maintenance is harder to capture as many of these services are one person operations that
advertise solely by word-of-mouth. There are approximately 30 of these services that advertise in the locally and
likely an equal number of smaller services that are most often found by word of mouth.
The size of operations ranges from small growers with a greenhouse or two on their home property to
large garden centers with a shop, display greenhouses, outdoor display areas, production areas and other
customer amenities such as gardening tools, books and garden-related gifts. One of the long-established garden
centers attracts out-of-town visitors and bus tours to visit their display gardens, café/tea room and has facilities to
host weddings.
This sector is largely successful thanks to the high level of interest in ornamental gardening in Tompkins
County, in part because some residents have disposable income to spend on ornamental in plants, and also
because the opportunities for gardening education (through Cornell Plantations and CCE-Tompkins) have
empowered home gardeners to try new plants and gardening techniques on their properties.
Outlook, Trends, and Future Opportunities
This sector has experienced growth in the last few decades, with the 3 oldest horticulture businesses
established over 30 years ago and a number of new businesses starting up in the last 5-20 years. However many
of these businesses reported a decrease in business over the last 5 years due to increased competition from big
"' 6 E 5 if 4
o 3
t 2 t 1
~ 0
Numbers and Types of
Horticulture Operations
Iii Christmas Trees
Iii Greenhouse/Nursery
Ornamental Horticulture Operations by Gross
Annual Sales Estimate
Below
$10,000
$10,000 to $40,000 to $100,000 $200,000
$39,999 $99,999 to to
$199,999 $499,999
Gross Annual Sales Esimtate
so
Horticulture Operations by Acres
Christmas
Trees
Greenhouse
/Nursery
Worked
Christmas Trees
Greenhouse/Nursery
Horticulture Charts 1 & 2
Horticulture Chart 3
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
box stores with garden centers. These larger businesses have name recognition, large advertising budgets and
additionally are located centrally in Ithaca, whereas most of the small locally-owned horticulture businesses are
located in the rural parts of the county and may be hard to find. However, many of these small businesses also
report that after the initial downturn in business following the opening of the big box garden centers, they
experienced a return of some customers who preferred the higher level of expertise and customer service offered
by the knowledgeable staff and owners of the local horticulture businesses.
Additionally, many County gardeners have a higher-than-average knowledge of plants and gardening
styles, and some of the local nurseries have carved out specialty niches, such as native plants, edible
landscaping and heirloom roses. Some of the larger businesses offer additional services and products such as
landscape design and installation, floral design, tools and gardening supplies, garden-related gifts and visitor
attractions. Two businesses market their plants only through mail order – one is a fruit tree nursery that supplies
tens of thousands of grafted trees to orchards across the country and the other is a perennial nursery that sells
mail order plants through their website.
Current trends among Do It Yourself (DIY) gardeners include more use of perennials, trees and shrubs
rather than bedding annuals, and an increased interest in incorporating edibles, such as fruit trees, vegetables
and herbs in the home landscape. Some of the local garden centers that previously only carried ornamental
plants have recently increased their selection of edible plants for sale, including less common species such as
paw-paw, elderberry and nut trees. There is also strong demand for native plants and the creation of more
sustainable permaculture oriented landscapes.
Opportunities for future growth of this sector will require increased outreach to educate new customers as
many of the older patrons of local horticulture businesses are downsizing to smaller properties without gardens.
It’s essential to continue to reach younger customers, including new homeowners, apartment dwellers and even
renters, using updated marketing strategies. Areas of expansion include more businesses having online ordering
and mail order options, facilities to attract tourists such as display gardens and cafes, and special events to draw
customers at slower times of the year.
Marketing Strategies
Horticulture businesses in Tompkins County use a diverse array of marketing strategies. All are engaged
in direct marketing through garden centers and greenhouses, mail order, at farmer’s markets, and gardening
events such as the Spring Garden Fair and Plant Sale, which features over 30 plant growers and attracts
approximately 3,000 customers at the 6 hour event. Marketing channels include traditional methods such as
newspaper advertising and customer newsletters while newer methods include websites featuring updated plant
lists and growing information, use of social media, and e-newsletters and direct mailings via email.
Group marketing has been a recent innovation for this sector, with a several horticulture businesses
located on the east shore of Cayuga Lake participating in the Cayuga’s East Shore marketing promotion, which
has a website and printed brochures that also includes accommodation, dining and wineries in the area. Another
group marketing effort is a joint brochure that lists 13 locally-owned horticulture businesses with descriptions of
products and services offered, directions to each business, website links and contact information.
Challenges
Increased competition from big box store nurseries
Need to reach new customers as older customers age out of gardening activities
Retaining experienced staff, especially seasonal staff
Seasonal nature of the business
Challenges to ornamental gardening (deer, drought, new insect pests)
Poor weather during busiest months (April-June)
Updating marketing strategies to reach younger customers
Industry Needs: Services and Support
Consumer education about where/what/why to buy locally-produced plants
Marketing support to promote locally-owned businesses
Strengthened connections between local plant/soil producers and local wholesale buyers
Knowledgeable seasonal labor force
Infrastructure: hoop houses and sales facilities
Training on current means of reaching customers, including social media
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
51
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Implications for the Future of Agriculture in Tompkins County
[This will be easier to write once the whole document is pretty much done,
may also inform the Executive summary section.]
52
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Part III Land Use Development and Policies
A. Land Use Development
1. Development patterns and implications for agriculture
The pattern of development in Tompkins County still shows signs of traditional development
including that within neighborhoods of the City of Ithaca, and in most village and hamlets. Suburban
development patterns along with low-density, scattered development became much more common in
the second half of the 20th century. The development of formerly open lands, including agricultural
lands has degraded water resources and influenced transportation choices. Between 1995 and 2012,
the amount of developed land in Tompkins County increase by 25 percent, or 6,000 acres, while
population increased by 5 percent. Nearly 90 percent of the newly developed lands were outside
established centers. The agricultural community is quick to note that this style of development
complicates how and where agricultural land is worked, and also drives up the competition for and cost
of land. This tension is particularly obvious in the northern portion of the county, including the Town of
Lansing
2. Farmland Demand: implications on sectors and farm size
As mentioned earlier in this document, in 2013 agricultural land owners throughout the County
saw assessed value increases of 100+%. This is the result of larger agricultural parcels (100-200 acres
and more) selling to farmers at prices that are competitive with development prices; agricultural
acreage has sold for $300 to over $500 per acre. This demand for land is driven primarily by larger
dairy and crop farmers who have increasing income as a result of continuing strong markets and a
need to acquire additional land to expand. At the same time, the increase in organic dairy and crop
production has led to a return to production of previously fallow land.
As less land is available for new and expanding operations, farmers have begun to out-compete
each other for available land, both for land purchases and land rentals. This makes it difficult for a new
operation to find an affordable parcel of even 30 acres or less, and for smaller operations to hold on to
rented land bases without a significant increasing in rental rates.
Overall, it will be difficult for new market growers to find a foothold in the County without a
significant financial investment in land. Small farms (owning 150-250 acres) will be able to continue as
long as they don’t need much, or any, rental land. Dairy and field crop farmers will mostly continue to
get larger, and will continue to cross County borders (in both directions) to find the land they need. Mid-
size dairy and crops farmers (250-500 acres) will be the group most likely struggling to hold onto the
land they rent, as larger operations offer more in rent and purchase the land they currently work.
B. Local Policy – Implications for Agriculture
Tompkins County municipalities are increasingly turning to formal planning mechanisms and
official policies to advance farmland protection. It is safe to say that every municipality in Tompkins
County is supportive of agriculture; however the ways in which this support is manifested does vary
based on municipality size, location, planning support, and regulatory philosophy. This section will
briefly summarize the activity that has occurred at both the County and local government level. This
work includes planning along with specific projects and also regulation.
1. County Wide Planning Efforts
As framed by New York State Law, land use authority resides at the local level, so Tompkins
County government’s role in farmland protection remains at the planning and project levels. Building
from the 1996 Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Plan, the County has led a number
of agricultural planning initiatives. Those efforts include, but are not limited to, the following.
53
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Comprehensive Plan and Agricultural Feature Focus Areas
The basis for this planning work was established in the
Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan (2004) which has
recently been updated (2015). Among other things, the
County Comprehensive Plan recognized the Agricultural
Resources Focus Areas (ARFAs) as key areas for
protection. These areas were further examined as a part of
the development of the County Conservation Plan which
identified the need for countywide agricultural actions. This
led to a formal Conservation Strategy adopted by the County
Legislature that included the following key strategies:
Prepare a long-range Purchase of Development Rights
Implementation Plan to actively market the program to
farmers in the ARFAs and identify farms that are suitable
for the program
Conduct a feasibility study for a Transfer of Development
Rights Program with interested municipalities
Promote specific land use tools that protect important
lands
Develop an Agricultural Planning Referral Program to
help farmers and municipal planning boards conduct
agricultural land planning
Create a pilot program to connect farmers with landowners of agricultural properties that are for
lease or sale
Proactively engage owners of land that is located in priority protection areas to participate in long-
term conservation programs
Promote stream corridor protection efforts
Create a long-range conservation funding strategy to support land acquisition, purchase
conservation easements, and manage and monitor conserved land resources
The County Hazard Mitigation Plan
A further County Planning effort was the update of the County Hazard Mitigation Plan. This
update examined 22 natural and technological hazards affecting Tompkins County including the impact
of climate change on these hazards. Tompkins County agriculture was one of the major industries that
received a hazard impact analysis. Potential impacts ranged from the increase in invasive species,
extreme temperatures, and drought. Farmers are already responding to warmer temperatures of the
past few seasons by raising longer season crops, more hay cuttings per season, and growing longer
season varieties. Drought and excess rain will prove to be more of a challenge. Some farmers lack
adequate pond resources for irrigation and there are many crops in the area that are not normally
irrigated. Additionally many farmers report that old tile drains installed many years ago are no longer
functioning properly.
2. Regional Sustainability Plan
In 2013, Tompkins County, in partnership with the counties of the Southern Tier, developed the
Cleaner Greener Southern Tier Regional Sustainability Plan (http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All-
Programs/Programs/Cleaner-Greener-Communities/Regional-Sustainability-Plans/Southern-Tier). The
Plan established 18 goals and outlines a detailed strategy for a future that is economically prosperous,
environmentally sound and socially responsible. Those goals connected with Working Lands and Open
Space include protecting best management of fields, forests and farmland, as well as, preserving and
connecting natural resources and open spaces. It further notes 65 actions that together have the
potential to reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions by over 32 percent within 20 years. Two of the
high priority actions related to agriculture include “supporting the development of processing and
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
54
Tomp kins County
Agricultural Resource Focus Areas
, ... ' I I -.-gric:111..,,iR,sourct1FocusM1
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
distribution facilities (Food Hubs) for local and value-added products” and “develop a regional program
to promote sustainable forestry and wood products.” These actions are intended to help the region
meet greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals, but also help reinvigorate the rural economy where
natural systems are protected and quality of life is enhanced
3. Tompkins County Economic Development Plan
The Tompkins County Economic Development Strategy includes a focus to:
Connect agriculture to value-added food production to increase financial returns to farmers
Ensure succession of farms to new farmer ownership
Develop financing models to support agriculture and food production
Encourage shared infrastructure for agriculture and farm commodities storage, processing, and
distribution
4. Town-Level Land Use Planning
Local municipalities have a broad range of tools available to them, including local land use
regulations. Many of these planning mechanisms, and municipal involvement, are summarized below:
Planning Mechanisms for Tompkins County Jurisdictions*
Plans
Jurisdiction
To
w
n
o
f
Ca
r
o
l
i
n
e
To
w
n
o
f
D
a
n
b
y
To
w
n
o
f
Dr
y
d
e
n
To
w
n
o
f
En
f
i
e
l
d
To
w
n
o
f
Gr
o
t
o
n
To
w
n
o
f
I
t
h
a
c
a
To
w
n
o
f
La
n
s
i
n
g
To
w
n
o
f
Ne
w
f
i
e
l
d
To
w
n
o
f
Ul
y
s
s
e
s
To
m
p
k
i
n
s
Co
u
n
t
y
Comprehensive Plan ‘06 ‘03 ‘05 ‘02* ‘05 ‘93* ‘06* ‘13 ‘09 ‘04*
Local Ag Plan No No No No No Yes Yes* No Yes Yes
Agricultural Zoning No No No No No No Yes No No No
Cluster Zoning No No No No No Yes No No Yes Yes
Important Ag Areas
Identified in Plan Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Open Space Plan No No No No No Yes No No No Yes
Policies/Ordinances
Zoning/Land Use
Codes/Restriction No ‘05 ‘95* No ‘11 ‘03 ‘04 No ‘07 No
Subdivision
Regulations ‘00 ‘07 ’12* ‘06 ‘70 ‘96 ‘04 No ‘07 No
Property Set-back
Ordinance No No No No No * No No Yes No
Right-to-Farm Law Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No
Site Plan Review
Requirements No ‘05 ‘96 ‘96* ‘97 ‘00 ‘04 No ‘07 No
Active with NYS PDR No No Yes No No Yes Yes No No Yes
Local PDR Program No No No No No Yes No No No No
*Due to a lack of farmland City and Villages are not included in this analysis.
•
•
•
•
55
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
A cursory review of the Local Comprehensive Plans throughout Tompkins County reveals a mix
of different of strategies and actions. Most discuss broad support for enhancing agricultural viability,
though few provide specific actions to implement this viability. Some plans like the Towns of Groton and
Danby call for the further definition of land use regulations to help support agricultural operations. Most
local comprehensive plans, including the Towns of Caroline, Danby, Ithaca, Newfield and Ulysses,
identify and map key areas for protecting farmland. Those communities that have undertaken Town
level agricultural plans (Ithaca, Ulysses, and Lansing) have prioritized actions for advancing local
agricultural protection and enhancement.
Right-to-Farm laws have been enacted in every Town in Tompkins County, though in reviewing
town planning documents most jurisdictions indicate an interest in making these laws more impactful.
One of the ways Towns have achieved this is by integrating the right to farm law directly into the Town’s
rural agriculture zoning district language. For communities without zoning, other strategies such as
integration of the right-to-farm law into planning documents, site plan review or subdivision regulations
might serve as an added avenue to promote the law and importance of agriculture in the Town.
Land Use Regulations
For those communities with zoning (Ulysses, Ithaca, Danby, Groton, Lansing, and Dryden) more
tools are available for farmland protection. When designed properly, zoning can be advantageous to
protecting agriculture. Examples of key provisions in agricultural zoning districts include broad
definitions of farming to help support the diverse nature of farming in Tompkins County now and into
the future; a very clear “purpose” of the zoning district which outlines the intended permitted uses and
those that are not compatible with agriculture; allowance for direct market farm businesses, such as
farm stands, within these zones, etc..
Municipal Comprehensive Plans & Agriculture
Throughout the County, municipalities are planning for agriculture in diverse ways. As
examples, the Town of Dryden’s comprehensive plan includes an appendix on developing strategies for
supporting agriculture; specifically, PDR, TDR, tax benefits for current use, and agricultural exemptions.
The Town of Groton’s comprehensive plan identified the goal of enhancing agricultural
economic viability through land use (farm-based agricultural allowance, cluster, smart subdivision),
protecting key agricultural land uses, and better integration of agriculture into local government policy
making. They also expressed an interest in developing new crops and markets.
The Town of Lansing is actively developing its own town-specific agriculture and farmland
protection plan, which includes specific farmland protection and enhancement strategies. Prior to that
effort, the Town comprehensive plan which is currently being updated, included goals and objectives to
protect farmland, businesses that are compatible with agriculture, and establishing a rural zoning
district that is supportive of agriculture.
The Town of Ulysses has adopted a town-specific agriculture and farmland protection plan that
recommends establishing an agriculture committee, further identifying critical agricultural lands to
protect, and supporting expansion of direct marketing opportunities including agri-tourism.
The Town of Newfield finalized its comprehensive plan, which won an Upstate New York
American Planning Association planning award, in 2013. The plan recognized the importance of
agricultural and forestry resources in the ARFAs within the Town. They further identified an interest in
increasing the viability of agriculture, CSA farm development and pickup locations, a directory of
agricultural enterprises, value-added operations, preservation of large sections of farmland, a farmer
advisory committee, and improved farmland access through leasing.
The Town of Enfield’s comprehensive plan identifies the importance of preserving swaths of
farmland and promotion of a diversity of farming operations. Enfield is predominantly agricultural, and
has not felt significant development pressure yet, but is seeing an increase in new construction of
homes and businesses along the Town of Ithaca border given the lack of zoning compared to the
neighboring towns of Ithaca and Ulysses.
56
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
The Town of Ithaca developed an agriculture and farmland protection plan in 2011 and includes
a host of prioritized actions for supporting the town’s remaining agriculture. One of the plan’s
suggestions was having a dedicated staff person to facilitate questions from the agricultural community.
The Town’s comprehensive plan includes recommendations affecting agriculture, including active
implementation of PDR, enlarged setbacks between agriculture and non-agricultural uses, requiring
space for community gardens in new developments and promoting household food production. An
active Town Agriculture committee has been moving forward with implementation of many of the
actions recommended in the Town’s Ag plan.
The Town of Caroline’s comprehensive plan supports farming and forestry through the
identification of key protection areas and broad goals of promoting the best agricultural lands,
enhancing healthy woodlands, and developing strong lumber markets.
The Town of Danby comprehensive plan recommends greater involvement of agriculture in
municipal planning, investigating added agricultural tax relief, conservation easement options, farmland
access through lease support, developing an open space protection plan, and reviewing current zoning
to identify its impact on farmland.
C. State Policies and Local Agriculture
1. Agricultural Districts
Other County planning efforts that
support agriculture have included the
coordination of the County Agricultural Districts
which include over 169,000 acres in two
separate districts. New York State Agricultural
District law (Article 25-AA of the Agriculture and
Markets Law) recognizes that agricultural lands
are an important and irreplaceable natural
resource that is being lost to development, high
costs of doing business, and some regulatory
constraints, and that certain actions can be taken
to retain lands in agriculture. It authorizes the
creation of local agricultural districts pursuant to
landowner initiative, preliminary county review,
State certification, and County adoption. The
purpose of agricultural districts is to encourage
the continued use of farmland for agricultural
production. The law provides a combination of
landowner incentives and protections, all of
which are designed to forestall the conversion of
farmland to non-agricultural uses. Benefits
include: preferential real property tax treatment
(agricultural assessment and special benefit
assessment), protection against overly restrictive
local laws and government funded acquisition or
construction projects, and private nuisance suits
involving agricultural practices.
The State Department of Agriculture & Markets Division of Farmland Protection manages the
certification of new districts and the review and recertification of existing districts. State certification
confirms that a district meets the purposes and intent of the Agricultural District Law and all eligibility
criteria described therein. Districts are reviewed for recertification every 8 years at which time the
County recommends properties for removal or inclusion (the State certifies all changes for district
continuation). Properties can be added to districts annually but removed only during the 8-year review.
57
Tompkins County
Agricultural Districts
Source . 2013Tu: P■roe!Oata, Tcwnpli:INI Counly~entOept.
~.Agricu l11.1ralD1s1rict1
... .Agricu llllralD1s1rict2
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
The Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board, along with the full County
Legislature, are responsible for conducting reviews of agriculture districts in Tompkins County. A
locally-added step in the review process is to meet with Town Boards to ensure that local land use
plans and agriculture district boundaries remain compatible and to inform local officials about the
provisions of the Agriculture District Law as it relates to local laws. .
Provisions of the NYS Agriculture & Markets Law, Section 305a - Agriculture Districts
Agricultural Assessment
One of the most important benefits of the
NYS Agricultural Districts Program is the
opportunity for farmland owners to receive real
property assessments based on the value of
their land for agricultural production rather than
its development value. The Department of
Agriculture and Markets uses a Land
Classification System based on soil productivity
to calculate agricultural assessments for
individual farms. Farmers qualify for Agricultural
Assessment if they operate seven acres or more
that has been farmed for two years, and they
generate $10,000 in agricultural product sales.
Landowners may qualify for agricultural
assessment if they have a written five-year lease
with a farmer who qualifies for agricultural
assessment. To receive the exemption, farmers
and landowners renting land to farmers fill out a
soils worksheet to classify their soil and then
apply each year by April 1st with County
Assessment.
Notice of Intent
Another important provision of the NYS
Agricultural District Law is the mandate it places
on state agencies, local governments, and
public benefit corporations to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to farm operations when pursuing
projects within an agricultural district that involve either the acquisition of farmland or the advance of
public funds for certain construction activities. Agriculture & Markets staff conducts detailed reviews of
Notice of Intent documents provided by project sponsors and recommend mitigating action where
necessary. Such projects cannot proceed until the Notice of Intent process is completed.
Restrictive Local Laws
NYS Agricultural District Law protects farm within an agricultural district against local laws which
unreasonably restrict operations. Agriculture & Markets staff, together with Department legal staff,
reviews existing and proposed laws to determine if they are compatible with farm operations. In cases
where a local law is determined to be unreasonable, staff works with local government to develop
mutually acceptable modifications. If local government is unwilling to modify a restrictive law or agree to
not enforce it on a plaintive farmer, the Department is authorized to take legal action to compel
compliance with NYS Agricultural District Law.
58
Tompk ins County
Agriculturally Assessed Land
Source·2013Tu.Paroel0•ta TomptmsC1111ntyA,geQ!!effl.Oept
Agricultural Property
Farmed by Owne r 8.472 acres
l easedFar~and8,570acres
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Sound Agricultural Practices
The NYS Agricultural District Law also authorizes the NYS Agriculture Commissioner to issue
opinions, upon request, concerning the soundness of specific agricultural practices. If the
Commissioner determines that a practice is sound, it shall not constitute a private nuisance. In order for
a practice to be considered sound, it must be legal, not harmful, necessary, and supported by expert
guidance or opinion. Cornell Cooperative Extension educators or Soil and Water District staff may be
called upon to issue an opinion regarding sound practices.
Agricultural Enterprise Determinations
Under Section 308(4), the NYS Agriculture Commissioner is authorized to issue an opinion on
whether particular land uses are agricultural in nature.
2. Farmland Protection
The County Agriculture & Farmland
Protection Board (AFPB) has been active in
educating farmers about the NYS Farmland
Protection Program funding for the Purchase of
Development Rights (PDR). AFPB has a process by
which farmers can submit a pre-application to the
AFPB for review. Then when state funding is
available, the board will contract farmers, review and
prioritize applications based on how closely they
meet the state program criteria.
The County program, which utilizes state
funding, has worked with seven farms in the Towns
of Lansing, Dryden, and Ithaca to permanently
protect over 2,200 acres of important farmland in the
ARFAs. The Town of Ithaca has also coordinated
the implementation of its own local PDR program in
the protection of an additional farm. Other
municipalities and farm families are considering this
for its function of protecting and reinvesting in their
farmland.
Given the increased competition for State
funds, the strongest candidate farms, those with
high development pressure, high quality soils, and
strong agricultural operations should be proactively
farms protected through the state program is noted below.
Summary of Farms Protected Through
New York State Purchase of Development Rights Program
engaged to increase the likelihood for continued PDR funding in Tompkins County. A summary of those
Farm Name Municipality Acreage
Howser Farm Town of Lansing 439 acres
Bensvue Farm Town of Lansing 951 acres
Lew-Lin Farm Town of Dryden 432 acres
Jerry Dell Farm Town of Dryden 375 acres
Ithaca Organics Town of Dryden 45 acres
Indian Creek Farm Town of Ithaca 42 acres
59
Tomp ki ns County
Agricultural Conservation Easements
Agricultural Resource Focus Area
v
c:J Agricullural E.a11men11
AguculluralRes0u1cesFocu1Alea
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
Part IV Priority Goals, Strategies, and Actions
A. Priorities
1. Location of Areas Proposed for Protection
Tompkins County has important, high quality
farmland worthy of protection. Some of those lands
provide a wider range of benefits than others. The lands
of highest value, and locations proposed for agricultural
protection, are those of highest quality soils and
contiguous active, working farmland. The maps of
highest priority lands for protection are noted on to the
right.
At the core of these lands are the Agricultural
Resource Focus Areas (ARFAs). These six agricultural
areas were identified in a 2002 countywide study, and
detailed in Part II of the County Conservation Plan 1,
which captured the highest concentrations of quality
agricultural soils and contiguous, actively-farmed land.
Although this study is over a decade old, these areas,
which extend into almost every municipality and include
63 percent of all farm operations in the county, still
remain the core basis for local agricultural operations.
Of these areas, the North Lansing-West Groton ARFA
remains the highest quality and is also at most risk from
development.
Combined with the ARFAs are the Locally
Important Agricultural Areas which are locations
designated by municipal comprehensive or farmland protection plans as areas of highest agricultural
worth by local communities. The County Agricultural Farmland Protection Plan recognizes the
importance of these locally designated areas. Special care should be taken to preserve the land that
supports agriculture in those areas. Actions should include proactive efforts include support for
acquiring agricultural easements in these areas, very careful scrutiny for any non-farm development
proposed in these areas, and support for agricultural uses in these areas. Together the Locally
Important Agricultural Areas and ARFAs constitute a total of 89,960 acres and represent the Tompkins
County High Priority Farmland Protection Areas.
There remain lands outside the High Priority Farmland Protection Areas where farmland
protection efforts should also be supported, though perhaps not focused. These areas include lands
that fall within Agricultural Districts 1 and 2 and farmland either owned or rented that is assessed for
agriculture. Rental lands continue to be of particular concern for long term protection as very few are
under long term leases despite the fact that they provide critical land that supports agricultural
operations.
2.Value to Agricultural Economy of the County
The vast majority of the 90,774 acres of farm base noted in the 2012 USDA Census of
Agriculture is located within the 89,960 acre High Priority Farmland Protection Area. This base of 558
farms is noted as producing $67,391,000 in total agricultural sales. The total value of those agricultural
properties within the protection areas is $191,525,409. Conversion of these lands to non-agricultural
Tompkins County
High Priority Farmland Protection Areas
••••• f ' • High Pfionty Farmland Protectlon Areas
Souto. TMt,W1tC..-yfl11-,0~
1 For more information on the Agricultural Resource Focus Areas (ARFA) visit the Tompkins County Planning Department
Webpage at http://www.tompkinscountyny.gov/planning/rural-resources and the appendix which summarizes ARFA
actions .
60
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
use effectively eliminates that portion of the agricultural economy, perhaps forever. Protecting working
landscapes not only protects the economic contribution agriculture makes to the rural economy and
rural jobs, but also provides open space and natural areas found on or near farms.
3. Open Space Value
Tompkins County’s agricultural lands form the backbone of the local rural economy and provide
quality of life amenities, such as scenic viewsheds, rural character, and open space. Agricultural lands
make up a significant portion of the Finger Lakes region. Much of the county’s tourism industry, which
in 2013 generated $2.15 million in room tax revenues, is reliant on the landscape; those scenic
resources framed by active farmland. On top to this, farms play a vital role in connecting natural areas
that assist in creating wildlife corridors, stream buffers which filter water and stabilize soil to increase
water quality. All of these functions are difficult to quantify, but farmland’s open space value is core to
the identity and economy of Tompkins County.
4. Consequences of Possible Conversion
With large parcels (100+ acres) continuing to be bought up quickly by farmers, the land most
vulnerable to development is that which is in parcels of less than 50 acres, especially if it is partly
wooded, divided up by hedge rows, difficult to access, and/or isolated from likely purchasers. These
parcels are often found within or in proximity to existing agricultural land, and although it will take time
for them to be fully developed into residential properties, when and as that is happening farmers will
experience more neighbor and community complaints. Farmer will also have more difficulty accessing
available land, as farmland becomes more fragmented.
5. Level of Conversion Pressure
Farmland road frontage in Tompkins County is slowly being converted to non-agricultural uses,
with most of this activity occurring predominately in the Towns of Lansing and Dryden. Development in
communities that are largely agricultural, such as Enfield and the western half of Ulysses, may be less
noticeable, as one or two houses a year seeming to have little impact in those agricultural areas.
However, as zoning restrictions in other communities further restrict what and where people can build,
people will more frequently look a little further out for a place to build their home.
61
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
B. Goals, Strategies, and Actions
Below is a summary of the six mains goals of the Tompkins Country Agriculture and Farmland
Protection Plan, It includes background of the plan goal, a goal statement a list of objectives and
potential actions as generated in the planning process with the farmers and agricultural land owners in
the County. A list of the high priority actions is included in this Plan’s introduction.
1. Agricultural Economic Development
A healthy agricultural economy depends on farmers’ ability to meet changing consumer demand
for existing and new products. This can create a need for marketing and business development
assistance and consideration of expansion and/or diversification. Agricultural operations also need on
and off farm infrastructure necessary for optimum operation.
Farmers are often challenged by the increasing costs of doing business while dealing with
variable product demand and price. Smaller operations are hindered by the lack of quality farm land at
affordable prices, the high cost of equipment and the inability to purchase feed and supplies at bulk
rates.
Farmers are seeking to become established or expand and diversify by growing larger –
acquiring more land and livestock, by seeking specialized product and marketing niches, and by adding
value to commodities.
Goal: To encourage business development, expansion, and diversification, promote collaboration and
networking, and improve access to support services and markets necessary for viable farm businesses.
1. Support opportunities for business development, expansion, and diversification
Provide direction for producers seeking value-added processing assistance
Compile and make available financial resources for producers, including loans, grants, buying
clubs, etc.
Identify and promote existing models of collaboration between large and small farms
Assist producers in evaluating their operations for size, niche, and integration opportunities
based on markets, cultural practices, available resources, etc.
2. Facilitate On-Farm/Farm Support Infrastructure
Work with other agencies to secure funding for farm construction and improvements
Create a regional hub for feed and other supplies
Promote shared equipment among smaller producers
Investigate options for shared processing equipment and shared cooler and freezer space
3. Develop a Comprehensive Marketing Strategy
Work with producers to identify new product demands and market to a diverse customer base
Help producers become proficient in the global commodities marketing system
4. Develop a Regional Website to Meet/Support industry Needs
Compile a list of wanted and needed conventional and organic feeds, hay, custom work, etc. to
include prices and descriptions
Compile a regional list of USDA/NYS slaughter and processing facilities, explore funding for
mobile processing unit
Compile a regional resource of farriers, tack shops, hay suppliers, etc.
Help identify sources for equipment, parts, and repair
5. Identify and publicize vets knowledgeable about small livestock
6. Address Risk Management Issues
Host a series of discussion meetings for producers to discuss what's in place and what is
needed for farms in the event of an emergency; create and share an action plan from that
information to share with municipalities
Encourage DEC to recognize deer parasites’ harm to small ruminants as justification for a
Nuisance permit
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
62
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
2. Local Foods
Meeting an increasing demand for locally-produced products creates opportunities for smaller-
scale and niche farmers. However, changing consumer interest and demand can threaten farm viability.
Consumers shopping for local foods typically have higher expectations for freshness and taste
as well as concerns about production methods and food safety. There is a need to better understand
who is the local product consumer, and also who is not buying local products and why.
Marketing is often a challenge, and farmers typically lack a background in sales. Linking
producers with new buyers and promoting local foods to consumers will help to grow the sector.
Goal: Pursue a policy which encourages local production, educates farmers and consumers, and
promotes consumption at every level (personal, institutional, etc.).
1. Assist Producers in Meeting the Demand for Products
Help producers access existing and new marketing outlets
Work with diverse ethnic groups to identify potential demand for new products
Assist producers in identifying new products to meet customer interest
Facilitate farmer-retailer networks to Increase local product presence in local stores
Identify opportunities for added value processing of local agriculture products
2. Promote Quality Production and Food Safety
Host producer workshops about good agricultural practices (GAPS)
3. Assist in the Development of Marketing Strategies
Help farmers become more effective marketers regardless of which channel they use
Identify new marketing strategies to access more local and regional consumers (i.e. agritourism
is one way to attract new customers to the area)
Provide instruction on effective producer-consumer/buyer communications
Educate consumers about buying local foods and how to use them
Coordinate Farm Tour weekends promote local foods to consumers
4. Support Farm Viability
Consult with small, local struggling farmers' markets to identify and resolve problem
Help farmers become more proficient at analyzing crop profitability and returns by market
channels so they are more strategic in what they grow and where they sell their products.
5. Local food consumer profiles
Conduct a consumer survey to determine why they choose local, where and when they shop
local, sales trends, etc.
Similarly identify barriers to local food purchasing (price, convenience, etc.)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
63
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
3. Land Use Policy and Regulations
State and Federal policies are constantly changing and farmers have a hard time weighing in
on their potential impact before they are implemented. Many policies are driven by people who have
very little understanding of agriculture and implications of proposed policies on both large and small
farms.
At the local level, municipal officials seeking ways to grow their communities may promote
development in areas detrimental to the continuation of farming. Many are unfamiliar with agriculture in
their community and the benefits it provides in terms of jobs, taxes, and open land. The NYS
Agriculture District Law provides some protection for farming operations, however, municipal officials
are unfamiliar with how this state law relates to local laws and their enactment.
Goal: Support diverse farming opportunities through land use public policies and actions that protect
farmland. Such practices, implemented across jurisdictions, should improve access
to farmland and support operations that do not have adverse impacts to other farm operations or the
environment.
1. Educate about negative impacts of some local regulations and zoning requirements on agriculture
Encourage Towns to appoint Ag advisory committees
Host regular workshops for municipal officials and employees about local laws that exceed state
requirements and/or are unreasonably restrictive for agriculture
Educate municipal officials about the cumulative and increasing impact of development on ag
land: roads, drainage, culvert maintenance
Encourage farmers to stay informed on municipal issues and organize to respond when topics
will impact agriculture
Tours for government officials to farms in their town/county
2. Provide Accurate Farmland Valuation Information
Host workshop for landowners to learn about assessment policies and practices and reducing
taxes through Farmers School Tax, ag assessment, combining parcels, etc.
Provide information on ways to reduce taxes on forested lands
Develop model lease of development rights program, in light of diminished PDR interest
Develop informational flyer for lenders to fix the disconnect between banks and current land
values
3. Alleviate Land Access Issues
Promote LandLink as a tool to link land seekers with landowners looking to rent or sell rural
properties
Develop an educational flyer for landowners to determine realistic land rental rates
Educate landowners about the importance of maintaining farm facilities and keeping fallow fields
mowed for future use and improved farm value
Provide workshops about Purchase of Development Rights and Conservation Easements
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
64
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
4. Agriculture Awareness
With less than 2% of the population living on farms, and most people being four or more
generations removed from the farm, the gap between farming today and most people’s concept of that
activity is quite large. Ignorance and misunderstandings lead to conflict with neighbors and threats to
farm and farmer safety.
A multi-dimensional approach to agricultural education, understanding, and appreciation is
needed. Farmers need to be able to tell their own stories be recognized for their important contributions
to their communities, the environment, and the economy.
Goal: Develop programs that improve understanding of farming practices and the contributions farmers
make to our community.
1. Improve Farmer-Neighbor Relations
Work with farmers to find ways to defuse neighbor complaints and threats about farm activity,
and provide liaison services for farmers needing to use the last-resort of Ag and Markets
intervention
Educate the public that forest and farmland is privately owned and should not be entered, or
items removed from it, without owner permission
2. Protect Farms from Non-Farm Safety Threats
Provide seasonal education about the potential dangers of unsafe driving near farm equipment
(for example, the 3rd week of April is Road Safety Week)
Educate the public about the threats to farms from human transported diseases and pests
Distribute information about local Animal Rights Activist activities to the farm community
3. Provide Public Education Outreach
Address concept of "industrial ag" with understanding that Agriculture is business and industry,
and economies of scale apply
Provide positive/factual/informative media reports and explain how farms are regulated farms to
counter misinformation
Provide research-based education about farm production methods
Provide Farm to Table/consumer education
Help farmers understand how to communicate effectively without negative comparisons about
other farms
Arrange for opportunities for farmers to be in grocery stores next to and talking about their
products
Develop and implement a farm recognition sign program
Create and distribute videos of successful farming
4. Provide Youth Education Outreach
Seek supporting documentation from schools with AgEd/FFA programs, engage local ag
supporters to push for these programs in all schools
Support school food growing programs
Support and encourage 4-H in all communities
Offer teacher training opportunities to educate them about local agriculture and the local food
system
Coordinate farm tours for teachers and youth
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
65
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
5. Environmental Quality
Agriculture serves an important role in maintaining environmental quality. Sustainable
agricultural practices, required by regulation on our larger farms, protect water quality and provide
wildlife habitat. Unfortunately, some wildlife has negative impacts on farm crops, livestock, and forest
land.
Farmers are adept at dealing with some climatic changes and emerging pests, however,
excessive rain and drought and high temperatures will present seasonal challenges. Emerging pests
pose new problems and require timely research into control options.
Agriculture offers opportunities for alternative energy sources, some of which are compatible
with farm land and others that can be produced from farm byproducts.
Goal: Model and promote sustainable agricultural practices that encourage the protection and
conservation of Tompkins County's agricultural and natural resources.
1. Promote Sustainable Farming Practices
Encourage use of cover crops, no-till, composting, and other such practices that improve soil
health
2. Identify and Address Climate Change Implications
Seek research grants to help producers assess the potential for double cropping, longer
season/higher yield hybrids; and ways mitigate production impact from too much or too little rain
Monitor emerging pests of importance to farmers and provide information on their
management/mitigation
3. Promote Water Quality
Provide public education about how farms protect water quality
Identify and publicize programs to assist farms in meeting storm water regulations
Identify and publicize programs for barnyard cleanup and manure management to reduce water
pollution
Educate farmers about wetlands identification and protection; encourage farmers to enhance
vegetative buffers
4. Address Wildlife, Invasives, and Insect Damage
Encourage an increase in quotas and season for deer management; no fee for land owners
Provide model hunting lease to agricultural land owners
Educate producers and landowners about potential herd damage from predators (dogs,
coyotes, wildcats) and ways to eliminate threats
Seek funding sources to aid producers in fencing high value vegetable and fruit crops
Provide landowners with education and eradication methods for Invasive species
5. Mitigate Impacts of Development
Educate municipalities about the need to adhere to storm water regulations and not allow
storm/surface water to be diverted onto farm land
Educate municipalities about the impacts of loss of forest land
6. Promote and Support Energy from and on Farms
Help producers learn about NYSERDA energy conservation and renewable energy funding
opportunities
Assist producers in evaluating production of biofuel crops
Work with interested producers to develop a local, grassroots farm group working on extruders
for vegetable oils, pellet making, etc.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
66
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
6. Future Farmers/Workforce
The traditional model of passing down the farm still exists, but new models for farm transfer,
ownership, and preparation are needed.
For farm and many rural children choosing a career in agriculture, the path is clear: work on a
farm or with farm animals, attend an Ag school. For other high schools aged youth, information is
needed about the many possible ways one might work in agriculture. There need to be systems for to
train and educate students so they can transition into the workforce or select an appropriate college
major.
Interest in farming is being fueled by the local foods movement. There are many individuals
seeking to start small scale direct market farms in our area. Many start by working on established
farms, gaining experience. Some have farm mentors, and others seek assistance from Cooperative
Extension or have attended farm business classes offered by Groundswell Center for Local Food and
Farming. All are challenged to find land, acquire resources, or secure markets.
Labor regulations pose several challenges: dairy farmers utilizing contract labor are concerned
about the stability of their workforce in light of immigration laws; new farmers are unfamiliar with labor
laws in general and labor laws prevent farm children from helping on the farm.
Goal: Create an environment that connects young people and others interested in farming with farming
experiences and opportunities that result in future farmers and successful farm employees.
1. Facilitate Farm Transfer: to family or non-family
Identify and promote alternative models to family succession, i.e. multi-family enterprises,
partnerships, etc.
Host workshops on the integration of the next generation into farm operation and ownership
Provide estate planning assistance to farms that will help the next generation start out with
lower overhead
Provide land planning services for transitioning farms
Develop mechanism for proactive linking between retiring and young farmers
Seek and publicize financing opportunities
2. Facilitate Farm mentorship
Develop mentorship opportunities by recruiting older farmers to assist new farmers
Identify and publicize existing opportunities, i.e. Groundswell's CRAFT program, Cornell, TC3,
TST BOCES
4. Promote Education and Training
Educate students about skills that are associated with agriculture, i.e. bookkeeping, product
development and marketing, etc.
Educate students about pathways to knowledge: preparing for secondary education
Support the development and continuation of Youth Farms
Provide new farmer training programs for adult learners seeking to start a farm (Groundswell
Center for Local Food & Farming and Cooperative Extension offer a Farm Business Training
class)
5. Facilitate Workforce Development
Identify ways to find reliable temporary help; address availability, attraction and retention
Offer training for farms in the use of technology: websites, social media, etc.
Provide opportunities for job training and creation; help farmers identify opportunities for
advancement for their employees
6. Raise Awareness about Immigration and Labor law Issues
Coordinate organized farmer pressure on federal representatives to reform immigration law
Provide workshops to teach farmers what children can do on specific types of farms
Help farmers prepare for labor crackdowns and labor shortages
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
67
Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan
C. Timeline for Implementation and Assignments
D. Evaluation Process
68
Part V Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan Maps
A. Tompkins County Land Cover
B. Tompkins County Agricultural Assessed Land: Owned and Leased
C. Tompkins County Agricultural Districts
D. Tompkins County Agricultural Conservation Easements and Agricultural
Resource Focus Areas
E. Tompkins County Land Use and Land Cover 2012
F. Tompkins County Agricultural Soils and Priority Protection Areas
G. Tompkins County High Priority Farmland Protection Areas
!,
! ,--
!
;"
i
' i
N +
1 0.5 0
Miles
Tompkins County
Land Cover
Source : Tompkins County Planning Dept , 2012 Land Use and Land Cover from 2012 Ortholmagery
----I
: ---------
Agriculture
Inactive Agriculture
-Developed
-Natural
Water
1bmpkins County Ranni1g Dept
Tompkins County
Agriculturally Assessed Land
CF\ ~~~~:;i-~-M..,=-~~~==F~~or_7C~~~~~~~J;)~2IJifl
\.
~
\
N +
' ~ !
!
!
j q
I
' ---------------'------
1 0.5 0 2 --------Mil es
Source : 2013 Tax Parcel Data , Tompkins County Assessment Dept.
\
I
I
l
l
i
'1
(} :
I
' '
q \J
Ci""
u
Q ~
U9sQ' ~~
~ fr
-------------
! Agricultural Property
!
' D Farmed by Owner 8,472 acres
D Leased Farmland 8,570 acres
1bmpkins County Ranni1g Dept
N +
1 0.5 0 2 ------- -
Miles
Tompkins County
Agricultural Districts
----
.
' I
!
I .
i
) -Ag ricu ltu ral District 1
___ ---------
1111 Ag ricu ltu ral District 2
Source : 2013 Tax Parcel Data , Tompkins County Assessment Dept.
1bmpkins County Ranni1g Dept
Tom k'
Agricultural C p ins County
A . onservaf gncultural Re ion Easement source Fo s cusArea
D Agricultural E W77hl asements
~ PendingA • • . gncultural Easemen
• Agricultural R t esources F ocusArea
1 0.5 0 1 ~~~2~3 ~4~5...; 6
Miles
Source · Tom • . pkms County Pl • annmg and A ssessment D epts
N +
Tompkins County
Land Use and Land Cover 2012
N +
-Agriculture
-Inactive Agriculture
Residential 1995 Percent 2007 Pe rce nt Pe rce nt 2012 Percent Pe rcent
-Commercial
Ge nera l Acres 1995 2007 Change
Agriculture 14632 32""6 13711 30.64% .am;
Barren or Dist urbed 217 0.48% 118 0.26% -45.52%
2012 Change
14728 3292% 7.42%
164 Q37% 38.92%
-Public/Institutional
-Industrial , Transportation, Transm iss ion
Comme rcia l 330 0.74% 423 0.95% 28.28%
Inactive Agri culture 3282 7.33% . 1866 4.17% -43.14%
Indust rial, Transportation, Transmission 1087 2.43% 1094 2.44% Q67%
Public/I nstitutional 190 0.42% 210 0.47% 10.81%
Recreat ion 215 0.48% 238 0.53% 10.81%
441 Q98% 4.07%
980 219% -47.48%
1157 2 59% 5.81%
223 Q5'"' 5.98%
228 0.51% -4.11%
Recreation Re si dent ial 3144 7.03% 3995 8.93% 27.05%
Vegetat ive Cover 14632 "·""' 16078 35.93% 9.89%
4145 9.26% 3.77%
15632 34.94% -2.78%
Water 6016 13.45% 6059 13.54% 0.7m6 6079 13.59% 0.33%
Barren or Disturbed Wetlands 1001 2.24% 952 2.13% -4.90% 968 2.16% 1.70%
-Vegetative Cover
-Wetlands 6,079 acres 1 0,5 0
Mi le s
Water 6,079 acres
Source : Tompkins County Planning Dept, 2012 Ortho Imagery
To mp kins County Planning Dept
N +
1 0.5 0
Miles
Source : Tompkins County Soil Survey 1965
-Priority Farmland Protection Areas
All Areas Prime Farmland
Farmland of Statewide Importance
Prime Farmland if Drained
1bmpkins County Ranni1g Dept
\
----------------
1 0.5 0
Miles High Priority Farmland Protection Areas
Source : Tompkins County Planning Dept
1bmpkins County Ranni1g Dept
Appendix
This page intentionally left blank
A.
Tompkins County Agriculture Economic
Development Initiatives
This page intentionally left blank
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES
to prioritize for Grant Funding as it is available for such purposes
SMALL FARM INVESTMENTS TO STRENGTHEN THE LOCAL FOOD ECONOMY
The following is a specific list of investments that could benefit smaller farm operations
oriented at marketing agriculture products directly to consumers.
ON-FARM INVESTIMENTS
High tunnels – USDA NRCS has funding for high tunnels that many area farmers have
applied for; more funding would enable an acceleration of tunnel construction on farms
providing an extended season of production and increased income. (approx. $10,000
per farm)
Proper on-farm wash stations for safe produce handling - a covered shed with wash
tables, a water tank and clean water source is minimal in order to ensure safe produce
handling. (approx. $5000 per farm)
On-farm short term cold storage – Cool Bot technology (air conditioning unit) can be
installed in an insulated trailer or shed to creates a low cost way to cool and store the
harvested crop improving quality prior to market. (approx. $5000 per farm)
Fencing to exclude deer – deer fencing is a must for any fruit and vegetable production.
(approx. $10,000 to fence an acre of land)
A grant program that provides funding for these on farm investments would help farmers
extend the growing season and result in increased income.
SHARED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
Shared infrastructure is another way to meet farm infrastructure needs required to grow
the local food system. Following is a list of shared infrastructure needed by Tompkins
County farmers and others in the region.
1) A survey of farmers in Tompkins County revealed that none have sufficient on farm
storage for fall season crops. More storage space would enable farmers to expand the
season and increase year round income. Need:A common long term cold storage
facility shared by multiple producers constructed with rooms to meet specific crop
humidity and temperature needs for fruits and vegetables.
2) Experience with the Local Meats Freezer Locker in Tompkins County built for
consumers showed there is a demand among farmers for freezer space. Need:A
common shared freezer for meat producers would enable producers to store frozen
meet in a safe and secure freezer storage facility until the product is sold.
3) There is sufficient consumer demand for local meats that a second Freezer Locker for
local meat storage by consumers could be constructed in Tompkins County. The
meat locker in Ithaca is full (70 bins) after being open only 8 months and we now have a
waiting list.
4) Flash Freeze Equipment for freezing fruits and vegetables in excess supply during the
growing season is another way for growers to add value to their product and market
year round.
5) A processing kitchen equipped with steam jacketed kettles and a packing line used for
making tomato sauce, salsa, pickles, etc. provides an additional opportunity for farmers
to add value to products, extend the season, and increase returns.
1)
2)
3)
4)
6) Small organic feed grain mill for animal feed – many organic meat producers (poultry,
hogs) obtain their feed from a mill in Penn Yan. Locally produced and milled grain could
be made available to small farmers and homesteaders at a competitive price.
All of the above shared items could be co-located in one facility. Small farmers do not
individually have the resources to invest in this infrastructure, nor does it make sense for them
to do so. In order to stimulate the local food economy, it makes sense to develop a shared
facility that provides the above services to farmers that will enable them to grow. An
opportunity exists to work with the Challenge Industries Food Hub in Groton and Regional
Access in Trumansburg to locate the following infrastructure/equipment.
Estimated Cost:
Shared Storage $50,000
Shared Freezer$50,000
Freezer Lockers $20,000 (for one 10x10)
Flash Freeze Equipment $100,000
Processing kitchen $135,000
Grain Mill $40,000
IMPROVED MARKETING CAPACITY
Another key need of small diversified farmers is for more strategic marketing. Many rely
on farmers markets as their first place of sale. However, most farmers markets are
underperforming. Farmer sales at many markets do not warrant the time they spend.
However, for newer farmers, farmers markets may be their only option. Most farmers markets
lack resources for proper promotion. Additionally there are many reasons why markets may
or may not be flourishing, these should be evaluated and strategies developed to increase
their potential to serve farmers and customers.
Many farmers lack product volumes and marketing skills to meet the needs of larger scale
wholesale buyers in our region. A concerted effort is needed to work with farmers to improve
their ability to meet the needs of buyers beyond farmers markets. This can be
accomplished through farmer buyer networking and farmer training in meeting buyer
expectations.
Cornell Cooperative Extension is well positioned to work with farmers in the region to improve
their marketing skills and help link them to buyers. Additionally, Cooperative Extension can
play a major role in working with farmers markets to evaluate and improve their effectiveness.
Marketing and promotion support is needed in general to raise awareness, educate and inform
consumers about local food purchasing options and opportunities.
Estimated Cost:
Farmers Market Evaluation - $15,000
Buy Local Food Promotion Campaign - $25,000
Farmer Buyer Linkages - $15,000
ADDITIONAL INVESTMENTS TO BENEFIT TOMPKINS COUNTY AND THE REGION
1) Agri-culinary Tourism – a key focus of the Tompkins County Agri-culinary tourism
initiative will be to build farmer capacity to host visitors. This may involve on farm
physical improvements to create a safe and welcoming environment as well as training
for farmers on hosting visitors. An overarching promotion effort will help drive
consumers to the farms.
Estimated cost: $50,000
2) Ithaca Farmers Market Re-Development – The Ithaca Farmers Market is one of the
region’s premier farmers markets with 120 members that come from 7 surrounding
counties within a 30 mile radius of Ithaca. The market attracts 3000-5000 customers
per weekend, 30% of those being visitors to the area. As a result, the market is one of
the higher grossing markets in the State with about $5 million in annual combined sales
(5 markets per week at various locations).
The market operates year round from April to December at Steamboat Landing, then
moving indoors for the winter to a rented space. A goal of the market is to build a
year round structure at the Steamboat Landing (Third St) Ithaca site. The current
structure is now 30 years old. When built, it was not constructed so to be easily
converted to a year round structure. The structure is showing its age and the Fire
Department is requiring installation of a sprinkler system which is not feasible in the
current structure. Thus, the IFM Board has decided to move forward with plans for
design and engineering for building a new structure on the site. The goal is to
obtain design and engineering specifications for a year round structure by the end of
2015 so that cost estimates for construction can be obtained in 2016 and a capital
campaign can be launched.
Estimated cost for Design & Engineering: $60,000
Estimated construction cost: $600,000
INVESTMENTS ON LARGER FARMS
The needs of larger farms are primarily based on infrastructure improvements to improve efficiency,
strategies to reduce costs, and ways to protect the environment. Funding from NYS and USDA has
been available for farm improvements that protect water quality.
Infrastructure to improve efficiency - the needs vary by farm so it is hard to generalize one specific
need that cuts across all farms. An assessment program to identify ways to improve efficiency may be
helpful, in particular where equipment or infrastructure investments might help address the problem.
Strategies to reduce costs – another farm specific issue, though cooperative purchasing of feed, fuel
and other supplies is one way in which farms have collaborated to save on input costs. Farm energy
audits are a high priority need so that farmers can begin to address inefficiencies and conserve where
they can. Linking farms with NYSERDA would be one place to start.
Protecting the environment - most farms are aware of and participate in programs offered by NYS or
USDA NRCS that are aimed at water quality protection. Funding has been made available for farms to
make a variety of infrastructure improvements.
Expansion of larger farms – expansion has generally meant that farm buy more cattle, build new dairy
buildings, or buy more land, and some associated equipment to operate larger facilities and fields.
Most farms utilize traditional agricultural lenders when making these investments. A few have tapped
into NYSERDA or other such economic development opportunities. Packaging private and public
investments to benefit one farm operation has not been a typical approach in agriculture but there may
be some operations where this might be an appropriate way to secure investment capital.
B.
1998 Agriculture & Farmland
Protection Plan
Actions & Accomplishments
This page intentionally left blank
Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan Progress
Through May, 2015
Economic Development
Finance/Credit: Improve access to finance and credit for agricultural enterprises
Create loan fund
Directory of lending programs
o Compiled and publicized list of grants available to farmers
Publish bulletin on lending programs and terms
Advisory panel to lenders
Food System Linkage: Build closer links between producers, area consumers, and institutions
Improve access to institutional buyers
o Continue to work with Cornell students on Cornell food service outlets
o Assisted Cornell Dining with Harvest Week farmer contacts and planning
o Cornell Local Meats Project
Strengthen regional food system
o Held 6 meetings for local restaurant owners/chefs and farmers to discuss needs, began
development of farmer restaurant network
o Strengthened existing and created new links between farmers and restaurants for Finger Lakes
Harvest Tasting
o Ithaca Fork – worked with the TC CVB to develop website of restaurants the feature local
products
o Farmer – Restaurant Directory – list of farms who want to sell to restaurants and restaurants
who want to buy from local farmers
o Farmer – Buyer Networking – linking farmers to wholesale buyers (winter networking meeting
held 6 times)
o Assisted with development of farmer markets in Groton, Newfield, Lansing, Dryden, Danby,
Trumansburg
o Providing on-going advice to IFM for various projects; new Ithaca Market at East Hill Plaza
o Developed and continue to host annual CSA Open House; created CSA display for use during
community events
Directory of producers and markets
o Developed set of 6 regional guides to local food producers & updated them annually
o Evolved local foods guides into one comprehensive resource
Support school purchases from local farmers
Agri-Forest Products: Develop and support production and market access for woodland
products
Educate farmers about forestry opportunities
o Held workshop for dairy farmers on timber sales
o Held workshops for woodlot/rural landowners; annual regional forest owner workshop
addresses various topics from pests to management, harvest and taxes
Reduce woodland assessments
Feasibility of regional wood processing facility
Agri-Tourism: Establish farm income generating activities by linking tourists, activities, and
agricultural sites
Inventory and create tourism attraction to farms
o Provided CVB with inventory of farm, market and plant businesses for annual tourism booklets
Create and distribute marketing brochures
o Local Foods brochures (see above), & also a Local Foods exhibit for use at local & regional
events
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Link farm trails to wine trails
o Hosted conference on ag tourism - farm trails (3/01)
o Hosted conference on regional cuisine
Bus tours to farms and other attractions
Market farm visits to specialized tourism segments, county farm brochures
Continue to support farmer – culinary – tourism connections via Finger Lakes Culinary Bounty
Created the Finger Lakes Cheese Trail/Cheese Festival – farmers quadrupled income at farm open
houses
Expanded and New Opportunities: Evaluate effective strategies in use elsewhere
Seek grants for targeted projects
Coordination of ag support resources
o Forming ag economic development work group
o Conduct annual hort employee training program
o Created a hort business network and hort business guide
o Hold Intro to Farming Workshops
o Working with Groundswell on Beginning Farmer Business Course
Value added processing
o Grants for farmers – USDA Value Added Producer Grants
Direct-to-consumer marketing
o Updated Local Foods Brochures
o Held Local Foods Tasting in collaboration with Ithaca Downtown Partnership and County CVB
during Apple Harvest weekend on Commons
o Participated in direct marketing conferences and workshops
o Studied farmers markets, provided recommendations for improvement as means of
strengthening them to provide more sales options for farmers
o Host annual Spring Garden Fair and Plant Sale 45 participants with over $60,000 in sales, over
3000 attendees
o Coordinated Herb Festival with 20 participants, 300 attendees (99 & 00)
Waste conversion and recycling
Pilot projects and commercialization of ag research
Use of commodity futures
Bulk energy purchases
Education
Farm City Day: Farm "open house"; major 1-day event
Organize a committee; recruit participants and donors; train participants; organize auction; plan
media tie-in
o Annual event for past 17 years, 1000’s of people learning about area agriculture through 40-50
interactive exhibits and activities
o Established base of support from farmers and ag industry for financial support, event volunteers
and future farm hosts
Farmer Non-Farmer Exchange Day: Job swap for a day; media event
Organize a Committee; select participants; plan the activities; plan promotion and media events
o Farmers not interested, liability issues
Ag in the Classroom
Raise funds from auction and solicitations; organize mentors; recognition, promotion and media
events
o Raise money yearly from FCD auction
o Received $2900 in grant funding to create Lending Kit Library & another $2000 grant to expand
it
o Quarterly newsletter for Elementary Educators
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
o Participation in the NYS annual Be Aware of Agriculture Contest
o Hiring and supervision of work study students to oversee resources and programming
o Day long visit to dairy farms for Dryden & Trumansburg 1st graders and Boynton & DeWitt 7th
graders with SWCD & Dairy Princess as collaborators; can serve as pilot for other schools
o Event planning and coordination for Fall Harvest for Kids, AgStravaganza!
o Activities at FCD, EAD, Fall Harvest for Kids, AgStravaganza!
o AITC articles written for Farm Bureau Newsletter, submissions to NY AITC e-newsletter
o Coordinate County-wide implementation of the annual state-wide Ag Literacy Week program
Other Outreach
Miscellaneous Educational Outreach
o Reviewed Ag Census data, prepared TC Agri-Facts, brochure
o Presenting ag-themed lesson during EAD, Created Lansing Family Farms exhibit and brochure
for Lansing School event
o Annual Fall Harvest Fest for Kids, providing ag ed & nutrition info to urban residents in a festival
setting
o Local Foods articles for Ithaca Child (quarterly paper plus 4 supplements)
o Monthly Local Foods column in the Ithaca Journal, quarterly in the Ithaca Child
o Developed & distributed “Living in the Country” brochure to educate rural residents
o Coordinate annual Dairy of Distinction update
o Assisted Little Tree Orchards in implementing an annual Mother’s Day Blossom Festival
o Participation on Danby Academy for Ag /Env Studies Steering Committee
Government Policies
Ag District Law
Educate town officials on Ag District Law
o Completed Ag District 1 &2 reviews; presentation to town boards or planning boards
o Worked with towns that do not have ag assessment for Fire Tax
Urge supportive policy decisions
o Advised TCAD staff in preparation of ag sections of TCED Strategy
o Annual Ag District Additions period implemented
o Developed and Instituted an Annual Ag Summit
Farmland assessment at "current use”
Work with Director of Assessment
o Worked with County Planning and Assessment on recent revaluation process
Land Use: Advocate for farmland owners in land use discussion and decisions
Articulate impacts of land use decisions on farming
o Provided input into Cayuga Lake Watershed plan
o Advised Town government officials and boards on issues pertaining to agriculture and land use
planning
Encourage public policy incentives for farming
o Held PDR workshops, PDR discussion with County Planning Federation, Planning Advisory
Board
o Assisted Towns with NYS PDR grant applications
o Assisted with development PDR feasibility study RFP
o Advised Dryden, Lansing, Ulysses on PDR programs
Recognized "farm friendly" municipalities
Educate public officials on "prime cropland" protection
o Prepared and updated Town Ag Profiles with Ag District Review Data
Urge Town of Ithaca incentives for ongoing farming on "preserved farmland"
o Advised Town of Ithaca on PDR program
o Worked with the Towns of Ithaca, Lansing, Ulysses, & Dryden to develop Town Ag & Farmland
Protection Plans
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
This page intentionally left blank
C.
Tompkins County
Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board
Meeting Minutes
This page intentionally left blank
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
February 25, 2015
Present: Dan Carey, Lin Davidson, John Fleming, Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek, Dave McKenna,
Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler
Excused: Scott Doyle, Don Specker
Associates: Nancy Munkenbeck
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order: 11:30 a.m.
Welcome and Introductions: The members welcomed Dave McKenna, our new representative from
the legislature, and introduced themselves.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Motion to approve by Kehoe, second by Davidson, approved without dissent.
Announcements
1. Teeter circulated a memo from Ag and Markets about new changes to Ag District Law. Specifically,
and perhaps of interest to some in this county, there are new land eligibility rules for Silvopasturing.
Other changes are a decrease by half of the number acres required to form an Ag District and a
clarification about land that can be added to existing Ag Districts: “Viable Farmland” is the
qualification, and there are no minimum parcel size requirements or financial thresholds.
2. Teeter also circulated the Enfield Wind Farm SEQR document, so members have time to peruse it
before discussion under new Business.
3. Teeter provided the postcard invites to the upcoming farmer/ag-land owner meetings for the Ag
Plan, coming up in early March.
4. Davidson reported the Safety meeting will be Match 4th at the Cortland Grange, during the day.
Old Business
1. 2015 Officers and Membership: Teeter reported a press release recruiting for a farmer and a farm
business representative was sent out to all local papers, including the weeklies, but she received no
inquires as a result. She did have a discussion with Russ Carpenter, a crop framer in Enfield and
Ulysses, and a longtime member of the International Soybean Board, and he is considering
applying. Mazourek is the only application for the board to act on today. Other suggestions: Paul
Thorp and Phil Switzer. Motion by Davidson to approve Mazourek be recommended for
reappointment to the farm business representative seat, seconded by Fleming, approved without
dissent.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (60'7) 2'72-2292 Fax (60'7) 2'72-'7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
2. Ag Plan Work: Teeter reported she’s been working through the document, which now has a cover,
an acknowledgements page, and an Executive Summary. She has been editing down (severely)
the Farm Profiles and adding them to the document as side bars, and adding text boxes where
additional profiles can be added.
Roth and Teeter did not meet with the PAB this morning; they planned to share and review the
Goals, Strategies, and Action Steps, but PAB was interested in reviewing the entire document for
discussion. They will attend next month, and will also be presenting to PEEQ (Planning, Energy,
and Environmental Quality).
Executive Summary: there was discussion about including staff funding as a request in the
document; currently, as a result of the last plan, county funding is provided for a half time staff
person. CCE has worked well as the recipient of these funds, as there are existing networks,
commitment to the ag industry, and CCE is well-regarded within the ag community. Currently, the
funding is added to the CCE budget. Motion by Mazourek that the Plan include a request to the
County Legislature to continue to fund a half time staff support position through CCE to support
the AFPB and support plan implementation, seconded by Davidson, approved without dissent.
Carey asked if CCE ever uses student interns or work study students, yes we do.
Roth said we should add a summary of the ag data section, and also an over-arching vision
statement.
There is the AFPB mission, and the Lansing Ag Plan Vision is good – Roth read this for the board.
It should support the priority actions and support our strengths and uniqueness.
Scheffler asked why the chart on page 29, Chart of Field Crops/chart 4, shows hay in bushels?
Davidson suggested we add hosting a farm tour for elected officials, under Ag Awareness.
3. Farmer, Ag Land Owner Meetings: As a reminder, these have been scheduled for Wednesday,
March 4th at the Ulysses Town Hall and Tuesday, March 10th at the Lansing Town Hall. Both
meeting start at 7:00 p.m. The format will include an overview of the plan and the process, an
opportunity to prioritize action steps, and small group work if attendance is large enough. We will
include maps and some Census data. Roth and Teeter will attend both meetings, Kehoe and Doyle
will attend Ulysses and Fleming, Scheffler, and Carey will attend Lansing.
4. Ag Leader Meeting: The meeting for ag leaders in the county has been scheduled for Tuesday,
March 31st, here at Extension, in the evening.
Purpose: To bring people who work in support of agriculture together to provide overviews of
their organizations, work focus, and job responsibilities
Goals:
To provide a better understanding of who is doing what on behalf of agriculture
To identify efforts that might overlap or dovetail
To identify potential opportunities for collaborate
To identify weaknesses or problem areas and work collectively to find solutions
To develop a method for on-going interagency/organization sharing
New Business
1. Enfield Wind Farm SEQR: Members had a chance to look through the document; there were no
comments.
2. Risk Management: Teeter reported on the ERME grant, CRDR training, and the Syracuse
conference.
Adjourn 12:45 p.m.
Next Meeting: April 22, 2015, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Back to evening meetings!
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
January 28, 2014
Present: Dan Carey, Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle,Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek, Monika Roth, Mike
Sigler
Excused: Ed Scheffler, Don Specker
Associates: Nancy Munkenbeck
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order: 11:45 a.m.
Welcome and Introductions: The board welcomed Dan Carey, the Chair of the Tompkins County Soil
and Water Conservation District Board – there is a seat for this position specified in the enabling
legislation. The District Manager, Jon Negley, has been filling this seat, but Dan is willing to take on the
responsibilities to lighten Jon’s workload. There was discussion about what the board is currently
working on, especially the County Ag Plan update.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: The minutes said November rather than December; motion to approve with this
correction by Kehoe, second by Davidson, approved without dissent.
Announcements
1. Davidson announced Farm Bureau is planning a DOT and Farm Safety training in the next month
and a half. This will likely include a lunch and have a small charge to cover that.
2. Kehoe reminded members the ag renewal applications have gone out and are due by April 1st.
Mazourek wondered if there isn’t a way to avoid having to do this every year; Kehoe said they have
been able make changes that reduce the required paperwork, but it’s a State requirement that this
is a yearly process.
3. Carey asked if the new Ag plan will become a law; only if rolled into Comprehensive Plans, but it
will be a guidance document.
4. Roth reported she and Teeter have begun meeting with the Town of Dryden to develop an Ag Plan
for the Town; there will be a farmer meeting on March 11th at the Dryden Fire Station. There is also
forward movement on the Lansing Ag Plan, and the Town is also working on the Comprehensive
Plan.
5. Roth reported there have been meetings in Lansing regarding sale of all or part of the Kingdom
Farm land, although nothing formal has been heard. Hoping for PDR funding is problematic, due to
the funding cycle and much-reduced difference between ag and development value.
Old Business
1. 2015 Officers and Membership: Mazourek’s term as Agribusiness Representative ended; he is
interested in continuing and has submitted an application. We will send out press releases and
other publicity and call for applications for the next meeting. For officers, the board agreed to
continue with Scheffler as chair and Mazourek as vice chair.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage fanning in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow fanners to operate economically viable enterprises.
2. Ag Plan Work:Goals, Strategies, and Action Steps: The board reviewed an updated matrix, which
has been amended these items by removing a few action steps that seemed incongruent with the
document, and editing several others for clarity.
3. Farmer, Ag Land Owner Meetings: These have been scheduled for Wednesday, March 4th at the
Ulysses Town Hall and Tuesday, March 10th at the Lansing Town Hall. Both meeting start at 7:00
p.m.
4. Ag Leader Meeting: The meeting for ag leaders in the county has been scheduled for Tuesday,
March 31st, here at Extension, in the evening.
Adjourn 1:35 p.m.
Next Meeting: February 25, 2015, 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
December 19, 2014
Present: Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, John Fleming, Irene Kehoe, Jon Negley, Bob Mazourek, Ed
Scheffler, Don Specker
Excused: Monika Roth
Absent: Mike Sigler
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order: 11:38 a.m.
Additions to the Agenda: Ulysses farmer-town issue.
Approval of Minutes: Motion to approve by Davidson, second by Kehoe, approved without dissent.
Announcements
1. Teeter provided the board with copies of a section of the Town of Ulysses ZBA minutes covering an
upcoming re-hearing of a matter concerning a farm in Ag District #2, as well as a clarifying e-mail
from Bob Somers of Ag and Markets. This is follow-up to the Board’s earlier review of the Ag and
Markets letter to Ulysses identifying the Town zoning as being unreasonably restrictive. Davidson
added that he visited the farm this morning, and they have about 20 sheep on the home farm, the
rest are on the Grassroots land. The manure pile is well-managed. Scheffler said that his
understanding is that a judge will determine what “adequate: means for fencing – it usually means
electrified. Negley said this situation is a reminder that some sort of outreach is needed for Planning
Boards, Zoning boards, etc. about Ag District Law, Programs like AEM, etc.
2. Doyle asked what other members know about the Owasco Lake watershed and potential
regulations to prevent the spreading of manure on frozen ground. Federally-approved nutrient
management plans actually allow this, as long as it’s not on highly erodible land. Fleming said up in
that area some farmers, and one in particular, spread on several feet of snow, then there’s a thaw
and some runs into the lake. Some states have specific ban dates for the spreading of manure, and
put money into storage for farms.
3. Kehoe reported ag renewal applications are going in the mail now.
Old Business
1. Ag Plan Work:Goals, Strategies, and Action Steps: The board reviewed each goal and identified
those actions each member considered of highest importance. A notation was made by each action
mentioned, and the following actions ranked the highest in each goal category:
Ag Economic Development
o Provide mentorship for producers seeking value-added processing assistance
o Compile and make available financial resources for producers, including loans, grants, buying clubs,
etc.
o Compile a regional list of USDA slaughter and processing facilities, explore funding for mobile
processing unit
o Develop a regional website to list wanted and needed conventional and organic feeds, hay, custom
work, etc. to include prices and descriptions
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Local Foods
o Identify and help producers access existing local, diverse venues
o Host on-going producer workshops about good agricultural practices
o Facilitate farmer/producer-retailer networks as a way to Increase local product presence in local
stores
o Coordinate Farm Tour weekends for local food producing farms
Landuse Policy & Regulations
o Host regular workshops for municipal officials and employees about local laws that exceed state
requirements and/or are unreasonably restrictive for agriculture
o Encourage towns to appoint ag advisory committees
o Educate municipalities about the cumulative and increasing impact of development on ag land: roads,
drainage, culvert maintenance
o Host workshop for landowners to learn about assessment policies and practices and reducing taxes
through Farmers School Tax, ag assessment, combining parcels, etc.
Ag Awareness
o Provide seasonal education about the potential dangers of unsafe driving near farm equipment
o Address concept of "industrial ag" with understanding that Ag IS business and industry, and
economies of scale apply
o Seek supporting documentation from schools with AgEd/FFA programs, engage local ag supporters
to push for these programs in all schools
o Support school food growing programs
o Provide positive/factual/informative media reports and explain how highly regulated farms are to
counter animal rightists' and others misinformation
Environmental Quality
o Provide cover crops, not-till, composting workshops
o Provide public outreach education about how farms protect water quality
o Encourage a decreased deer population by an increase in quotas and season, and no fee for land
owners.
o Educate municipalities about the need to adhere to storm water regulations and not allow
storm/surface water to be diverted onto farm land
Future Farmers/Workforce
o Identify and promote alternative models to family succession, i.e multi-family enterprises,
partnerships, etc.
o Develop mentorship programs for young people interested in production agriculture
o Work to address chronic problem of finding reliable temporary help: availability, attraction and
retention are problems
o Offer training for farms in the use of technology: websites, social media, etc.
New Business
1. Town of Ulysses/Spot Hollow Farm Issue: The board discussed the matter, and decided to draft a
letter for Scheffler to sign and Teeter to deliver to the BZA at tonight’s meeting. Moved by Kehoe,
seconded by Fleming, approved without dissent.
2. Joint Ag Meeting: Teeter provided information on a concept she and Roth have discussed, to bring
people who work in support of agriculture together annually to provide overviews of their
organizations, work focus, and job responsibilities. Goas for this type of event would include:
To provide a better understanding of who is doing what on behalf of agriculture
To identify efforts that might overlap or dovetail
To identify potential opportunities for collaborate
To identify weaknesses or problem areas and work collectively to find solutions
To develop a method for on-going interagency/organization sharing
Organizations/people to include: CCE-Tompkins Ag and 4-H staff, CCE Dairy & Field Crops staff,
TC SWCD, TC Dairy Princess, TC AFPB, TC FB, FSA, NRCS, FLLT, Town Ag Committees.
Members liked this idea, and would like Teeter to move forward with it, with an AFPB sponsorship,
for an early March meeting.
Adjourn 1:13 p.m.
Next Meeting: January 28, 2015, 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
November 19, 2014
Present: Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Jon Negley, Ed Scheffler, Don Specker
Excused: John Fleming, Bob Mazourek, Monika Roth
Absent: Mike Sigler
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order: 11:38 a.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Motion to approve by Kehoe, second by Specker, approved without dissent.
Announcements
1. Teeter reported the Board received a copy of an Ag and Markets letter confirming Glenwood Farm
was not selected for a PDR award this round. This was the only Tompkins County application.
Increased farmland values have impacted our farmer interest. Scheffler said he’d like to see
something more universal.
2. SWCD board is looking for a new at-large member, if anyone has any suggestions, please let him
know.
Old Business
1. Ag Plan Work:
a. Review of Draft Document: Members reviewed the document together, page by page, offering
changes and edits:
o Should the order be background and actions? Is there too much? Should the strategies and
actions be first?
o Formatting needs to make it easier to read, and it needs page numbers on table of contents.
o Make charts as simple as possible – eliminate decimal places.
o Page 11: why the drop in organic production? Is 2007 when USDA took over certification?
Have organic farmers moved to Farmers Pledge?
o Part 4: Do we need to have the spreadsheet and a narrative of goals, strategies and action
steps?
o Appendices: Should we include PDR criteria, right to farm and other model ordinances?
Groton and Dryden include the town’s right to farm ordinance on the building permit.
o Reference documentation about climate change and agriculture?
o Include water and natural resources in the narrative sections – the complex nature of
agriculture and its intersection with water and natural resources – maybe in Part 2 or 3?
Doyle and Negley will put something together.
o Add reference to AEM with SWCD.
o Sector Profiles, or elsewhere: basic summary of outreach for the plan.
o Need to include non-farmer ag land owners. Do we need a separate meeting for these
folks?
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
o Should we include DEC modelling efforts for southern end of Cayuga Lake, and potential
TMDL requirements? Acknowledge in some way?
o Perhaps an environmental profile in Part 2 to include some of these items?
o Need to work with larger dairies to keep soil in place, don’t leave ground bare in the winter.
There is a new cover crop program available through Pat Barry. Issue can be the farmers
are still applying liquid manure, although they could inject it into a cover crop. Crop guys
have some residue, but it is an issue on those farms, too. Needs to be practical. Cover
crops can be turned under to build soil.
o Young people returning to the family farm and trying to fit in can be very difficult, parents
don’t want to let go of the farms – how many farmers are in the fifty’s and mom still owns the
farm?
o There is now a $5 million estate tax exemption in NYS.
o Dry milk solids for export are also contributing to the current milk price stability.
o Farm concerns with invasives: emerald ash borer, hemlock woolly adelgid, Ragusa rose,
deer and deer ticks are very big. Farmers can get permits, but that’s one more thing to do,
and what to do with the carcass.
o Beaver are the next deer.
b. Strategies and Goals matrix review: Teeter distributed copies of the revised Strategies and
Goals matrix, which now has a weighted ranking and strategies and items re-written as actions.
Members will review for next time for editing, further consolidation of action items, and top 3-5
action items for each goal. Next steps will be taking another look at time frames and partners.
New Business
1. 2015 Officers: Members recommended Scheffler continue. Teeter will check with Mazourek if he
would like to continue. The board will vote on officers at the January meeting. There continues to be
a vacancy on the board, but an application is expected. The board talked about engaging young
farmers and the problems getting them involved.
Adjourn 1:13 p.m.
Next Meeting: December 17, 2014, 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. –one week early
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
October 24, 2014
Present: Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler, Don Specker
Excused: Bob Mazourek, Jon Negley
Absent: John Fleming, Mike Sigler
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Guests: LeGrace Benson, Pete Larson, Keith Thompson, John Wertis (all Ag & Hort Committee),
Fay Benson (Farm Bureau)
Call to Order & Introductions 7:00 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Corrections: Kehoe was not at the last meeting, moved with corrections by
Kehoe, second by Specker, approved without dissent.
Announcements
1. Teeter reported the Board received a copy of an Ag and Markets reply to the Town of Ulysses
concerning restrictions in the Town’s zoning that have been applied to a farm operation in one of
the county’s NYS-certified agricultural District. She circulated it for member review.
2. Roth will email a link to the county for the strategic tourism plan; there is an Agriculture and Culinary
Task Force to develop a section of the plan. There will be a community forum on November 10th, 6-
8 p.m. at the Greenstar Space to gather input about agri/culinary tourism.
3. Doyle reported that earlier this week there was a press release from NYS Ag and Markets listing
the PDR award recipients. The only Tompkins application was Reynolds farm in Ulysses. Mazourek
decided not to go forward.
Presentation: Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan Report, Scott Doyle, County Planning
Doyle provided an overview of the draft plan and policies. The process began with a survey in
September and October of 2013, followed by a summary of survey results in November. In June of this
year broader meetings were held for the public to review and comment on the 100-page draft document
– which can be found on the County Planning web site. Feedback is still being sought through the end
of this month (October), then the final document will go to the County Legislature in early 2015.
There are nine chapters with three overarching themes: Sustainability, Regional Cooperation,
and Fiscal Responsibility. The chapters are:
1. The Economy: stresses economic prosperity should be accessible to all
2. Housing: stresses should be affordable, safe, and appealing
3. Transportation: stresses should be efficient, safe, and affordable
4. Natural Resources: stresses importance of natural and working landscapes
5. Water Resources: stresses should be clean, safe, and protected
6. Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: striving for energy system that is climate neutral
7. Adaptation: entire community should be prepared for economic, environmental, and social impacts
of climate change
8. Healthy Communities: promote healthy, safe, and active lifestyles
9. Development Patterns: encourage development in compact, walkable, mixed-use communities
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
There are several remaining workshops this month, and written comments are also welcomed.
F. Benson said he has reviewed the draft document, and noted that especially the Natural Resources
chapter lists just generalities, not a lot of specifics. Doyle resonded that the actual strategies are more
detailed. Davidson mentioned the need for funding to achieve actions. Wertis wondered if it was
actually up to municipalities to determine actions. Specker asked how often this plan is updated; Doyle
responded every ten years, but this is actually the first update of this document. Doyle asked Davidson
for clarification on funding – Davidson said the plan calls for more trails, more transportation, smaller
footprints; where will the required funding come from? Teeter reported a farmer from Dryden thinks the
“piece of the economic pie” attributed to agriculture seems very small. Roth said there are probably
some things missing, but agriculture is not the number one industry, it’s actually the finance industry;
agriculture is number two. When you add in “food” the number gets much larger. It’s important to
consider the sum total of agriculture’s impacts, not just farm-gate dollars. Davidson said it’s important to
state agriculture pays its way. Roth asked when a final draft is anticipated; Doyle said late November,
early December. She asked if there will be a general plan, and then strategies developed; Doyle said
strategies are in place now.
Old Business
1. Ag Plan Work:
Strategies and Goals matrix review: Teeter distributed a compilation of the responses received
for rankings and time frame estimates. Roth said as she read through she noticed some items
are statements, others are actions, etc. There may also be a need to stream-line some of the
action steps. There was discussion about items scoring 6 of more “high” ranking. Perhaps we
need action categories: action, research, policy, funding, education, statements: can these be
turned into actions? It was suggested we now weight each item. Doyle said it would be great if
at the end of this process we could list 10-15 specific top items. Roth said we have six areas; if
we could come up with a couple key recommendations for each one, we’d have some specifics
to focus on. L. Benson asked if there could be some analysis done and then that information
shared again – yes, that is the plan.
Schedule of meetings: Audiences, locations, dates: it was suggested we hold two meetings, one
on each side of the lake (Dryden Fire Department, Enfield Community Building), in February.
New Business
1. Kingdom Farm Update: Roth reported Kingdom Farm is officially listed for sale at $3.1 million. It is
approximately 525 acres, some good soils, some not so good soils. The Town of Lansing Board
and the Town and the community are interested in being proactive to keep this land in agriculture.
Ag and Markets has become aware of this, and are also interested in seeing this land stay in
agriculture. They have discussed it with Roth and suggested a potential Lease of Development
Rights process; unfortunately, the next opportunity is a year away. Kehoe reported her office has
heard there is an offer. There is interest in a group forming to think through and research the
options. Roth said this situation highlights the need for a means of quick funding to step in and buy
valuable agricultural land, put it under easement, and then re-sell it to a farmer.
2. 2015 AFPM Membership: There are no terms ending this year, the only vacancy is Roy Trask’s
seat.
Adjourn 9:00 p.m.
Next Meeting: November 19, 2014, 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. –one week early, back to daytime
•
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
August 27, 2014
Present: Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, John Fleming, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler, Mike Sigler, Don
Specker
Excused: Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek, Jon Negley
Liaisons: Mike Ashdown/Dryden Grange
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Guests: Aaron Ristow, TC-SWCD
Call to Order 7:05 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: Davidson has a template for the board to review about the EPA’s over-
reach.
Approval of Minutes: Corrections: Doyle, Sigler, and Teeter were all present at the July meeting. PAB
member name is Mina, and it’s Don Barber, not Dan Barber; and define, not defile a ranking system.
Moved with corrections by Fleming, second by Doyle, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Roth: provided LandLink postcards and Small Farms Quarterly. LandLink sign-ups continue to
increase, several each week. Based on the land list and owner goals, some real “matching” will be
needed. She talked to Specker about the need to provide a presentation for the Land Trust.
2. Fleming reminded folks of the birthing center at the State Fair; their cows were up there earlier this
week. The Fair folks plan to have three births a day. There was a C-section, but it was handled
really well, in front of a crowd of 600, and it was a very positive experience. People returned later in
the day to see how the “mom” was doing.
New Business
1. Non-Farm Neighbor Issue: Teeter shared with the Board a call she received from a farm neighbor;
she was aware of this individual prior to the call, as he has been making various complaints to
various sources for some time. She suggested he write to the board with his concerns, and that the
board would review the matter and respond. She expected something before the meeting but
received nothing. Aaron Ristow shared that staff have been working with this farmer, and although
there are some minor issues, it’s clear the real concern is the neighbor bought a house surrounded
by crop land that now supports livestock. Teeter said she knows the farmer has made multiple
attempts to appease the neighbor, but nothing seems to make a difference. The board concurred
nothing was likely to make this neighbor happy until all livestock were removed, and it might be a
case of Ag Mediation. Ristow will follow-up with the farmer on SWCD recommendations, and also
suggest Ag Mediation.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Farm City Day Review: Teeter reported the turnout was good, although not as large as anticipated;
there were a lot of other family-friendly events going on nearby, and many people reported just
coming from or heading to something else. Folks really enjoyed the event, especially the wagon
ride farm tour. During the ride, the wagon stopped at the hoof trimmer, something we’ve never had
before. Also, just past the hoof trimmer were the close heifers, and one of them was giving birth for
most of the afternoon, so that was very exciting. Thank you notes are 90% finished. Davidson
mentioned a Schoharie County Family Farm Day brochure he sent to Teeter, which was a
promotional item that included lots of information about different farms and was all over the place
well in advance of the event. This led to a discussion about confusion over our event’s name – a lot
of people still don’t understand what the event is about based on the name. We could easily change
it to something like Family Farm Day, Visit the Farm Day, Fun on the Farm Day, etc. and keep the
FCD logo with a small notation “a Farm City Day Event”
2. Ag Plan Work: Roth reviewed the plan’s format and sections; much of the work is done, with just
some revisions needed, and everything is now being inserted in the proper place in the draft
document. Teeter has drafts of the sector profiles, and the will be working on farm interviews and
profiles over the new couple of weeks. Draft sector profiles were distributed. Aaron Ristow
mentioned SWCD’s TMDL work, and suggested it should be mentioned in some way in the plan. A
timeline extension request has been submitted and will take us into late spring. Members broke into
pairs and reviewed specific Sector Profiles, then submitted suggested changes and additions.
Davidson and Specker will add more if they can get their Sector by e-mail; Teeter will send it to
them.
Adjourn 8:40 p.m.
Next Meeting: September 24, 2014, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
July 23, 2014
Present: Jon Negley; Lin Davidson, Ed Scheffler, Monika Roth, John Fleming,
Excused: Scott Doyle, Mike Sigler, Don Specker, Debbie Teeter
Absent: Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek
Liaisons: Mike Ashdown/Dryden Grange
Call to Order 7:05 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Davidson, second by Negley, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Doyle: PDR Applications due the end of next week. Town of Ulysses will be applicant for Reynolds,
if everything comes together. The County will submit the Mazourek application.
2. Scheffler: Circulated the program from Grasstravaganza! and reported it was a good program.
New Business
1. Ag Plan Grant Extension Timeline: Roth provided copies of the work that remains to be done; data-
gathering work is pretty much finished and is being complied and interpreted. Remaining is a lot of
the writing and the identification of lands to be protected. At the next meeting there will be a
substantial draft for the board to review. We will begin shopping it around in September. Should we
do a road show to all the towns? It will take two months, October and November – this would be a
short informational presentation (15 minutes). Also, a presentation to the County Board as a
precursor to the need for a Public Hearing and a vote – perhaps in November, with a Public Hearing
in January. We will need to hold farmer/ag land holder meetings, probably in November, maybe two
meetings - one on each side of the lake. Doyle explained our contract is up at the end of August,
but outreach really needs to be done, so an extension has been applied for. The AFPB’s approval is
required to apply for an extension. Davidson moved the AFPB approve a request for a timeline
extension for Ag Plan Funding use, seconded by Fleming, approved without dissent.
2. Farm City Day: Volunteers are needed for the event, especially for Saturday morning set-up (putting
up signs, signing and directing volunteers, etc.) at 9:00 a.m. and in the Welcome Area from 10:30
until 4:00 p.m. The event has come together well, with a full complement of farm service folks
making donations and/or offering exhibits/demonstrations for the event. Scheffler, maybe some
others. Will make it
3. Planning Advisory Board Meeting Update: After last month’s meeting, three members (Nina
Amundsen, Todd Bittner, and Dave Herrick) volunteered to help review plan drafts and provide
feedback.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. EPA Clean Water Act Proposed Changes: Members received links to recent clarification from
NYFB; Davidson asked Sigler if he would bring Farm Bureau’s resolution forward to the County
Legislature; he said he would. Negley provided some additional information from the proposal,
specifically the definition section – which is very tricky, and in some cases can be open to
interpretation. It would be left up to the Army Corps of Engineers to make final decisions. Fleming
wondered how they would be able to handle the anticipated extra work. Negley said there are two
staff members in our region, and permits go through Buffalo. Davidson asked if Town Highway
Departments will have to get permits to clean ditches; Negley said there is a definition for
maintenance, but it is open to interpretation. Teeter will email the resolution from 2012, the Caroline
Town supervisor Dan Barber’s response to the AFPB. The Town remains committed to adding an
additional level regulation of CAFO’s, should any ever exist in the Town.
2. PDR Letters of Support: Members received draft letters by e-mail – thanks for those that
responded with comments and corrections. An updated letter was reviewed by members and some
additional edits were suggested. Motion by Davidson to authorize Chairman Scheffler to sign the
letter of support, second by Sigler, approved without dissent.
3. Ag Plan Progress, Map Plan Review: Doyle provided an updated map showing the Ag Resource
Focus Areas, current PDR land, Ag Assessed Land (owned and rented), the Ag Districts, and
municipality-identified ag land for protection. The overlaps are very interesting; do they make a case
for re-drawing any of the lines that identify ag land as high priority for protection? We need to
identify those areas and define what it would mean to loss some of that land. Generally, the
identified areas could be somewhat small, depending on the area. We will need to think about
priorities, i.e. in the ARFA is priority 1, outside of the ARFA but in the Ag District is 2, Land in
proximity to already preserved land; operations outside of the ARFA that work a lot land in one are
other criteria to consider. We can take a look at re-drawing the lines and also defiling a ranking
system.
Adjourn 8:40 p.m.
Next Meeting: August 23, 2014, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
June 25, 2014
Present: Jon Negley; Lin Davidson, Irene Kehoe, Ed Scheffler, Monika Roth, John Fleming
Excused: Scott Doyle, Don Specker, Debbie Teeter
Absent: Bob Mazourek, Mike Sigler
Liaisons: Mike Ashdown/Dryden Grange
Call to Order 7:00 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Kehoe, second by Fleming, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Roth:
Distributed information cards about Land Link to help with promoting the program.
Farm City Day will be Saturday, August 9th, 11-4, more information at the next meeting.
2. Negley: The District is applying for a Soil Health Mini-grant for cover cropping; it will provide seed –
looking for farmer cooperators. Grants would start January of 2015, $25,000 per county. .
New Business – None
Old Business:
1. Town of Caroline Site Plan Law: In Ag & Markets hands; board members would like a copy of the
letter they sent; Teeter will forward and check to see how it is being handled.
2. EPA Clean Water Act Proposed Changes: No updates.
3. PDR – Motion by Davidson to support PDR applications and authorize drafting support letters as
needed by the state for Mazourek and Reynolds farm applications, second Kehoe, approved.
4. Ag Plan Progress:
o Teeter had shared themes, strategies, action steps for review; EVERYONE please email her
any feedback you have. Davidson asked a question about strategies…who will do all of the
work?? Roth said that some actions will be assigned to AFPB, other maybe CCE or SWCD, or
another entity. Some actions might be recommendations to NYS/Farm Bureau or Feds. In the
last plan for each strategy/action step, we indicated who the likely entity would be to act on the
recommendation.
o Need an implementation plan:Last time we recommended that the County provide funding for
a half time staff support position at CCE. We are now only getting funding for about 1/3 of a
position because the amount has not been increased in the past 15 years. We should request
funding to cover the position at half time, or we might want to ask for a full time position. In
some counties they have funded an ag development position to move the plan forward.
Davidson commented that there are other funding sources to explore—Regional Economic
Development funds, for example.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
o Land to protect: The board reviewed maps from County Planning:
LULC: Shows a lot of residential road front development…not quite as much in Lansing or
Groton as compared to other towns
Ag District: Should be considered the base map for farmland protection. Map the parcels
within the district receiving ag assessment (owned/rented).
Ag Assessed land owned & rented: Owned land might have a higher priority for protection
than rented land.
ARFA with town ag lands identified: Are there other towns where the comp plans or zoning
references ag lands – for example, Lansing has an RA zone, what about Dryden, Groton,
Newfield—anything we could look at from those towns?
ARFA: Can we map ag lands outside of ARFA; superimpose Ag Assessed parcels map?
Soils: Should be a criteria for farmland protection.
New Map: Generate a map based on properties with Ag classification code: by enterprise,
type, etc.
o Other Comments:
Protected ag land might make it more attractive for non-farm development to occur.
Who is farming and not getting ag assessment; we may want to reach out to these folks.
Debt for Nature is a loan forgiveness program; 50 year easement that is available from
USDA FSA. The former Feeney Farm has enrolled woodland; there may be some others
interested in this.
We may want to review regional economic development plans as they pertain to agriculture
(also Greener Cleaner NY): what are the goals of these plans? We should make sure to
have some complimentary goals.
Share draft goals, etc. with NRCS staff, FSA, regional dairy team for their input -or invite
them to a meeting?
o Roth reviewed the plan timeline:
July-August: WRITING big time!
September: start circulating the draft report to the county.
AFPB approval?
End of October, early November: Host farmer/landowner meetings around the county:
maybe 3.
November or December: Public hearing?
December grant done, report to state for approval.
Adjourn 8:30 p.m.
Next Meeting: July 23, 2014, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
May 28, 2014
Present: Scott Doyle, John Fleming, Irene Kehoe, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler, Mike Sigler,
Don Specker
Excused: Lin Davidson, Bob Mazourek, Jon Negley
Associates: Nancy Munkenbeck
Liaisons: Mike Ashdown/Dryden Grange
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 7:00 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Sigler, second by Kehoe, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Doyle: Received an e-mail today regarding the REAP program, and he circulated it and said we
should probably get up to speed on this and really encourage participation.
2. Ashdown: reminded everyone Dryden Dairy Day is Saturday, June 14th. Teeter mentioned Farm
Bureau will have an exhibit this year.
3. Scheffler and Specker: there was a brief conversation about the status of corn planting.
New Business
1. Proposed Changes to the Clean Water Act: Teeter reported that although the information from the
EPA, NRCS, etc. says there are no worries for farmers from the proposed changes, Farm Bureau is
still saying it will add to the oversight of items like ditches, seasonal waterways, wet areas, etc.
TCFB approved a resolution against the changes at last week’s meeting, which will be forwarded to
the County Legislature and added to others in the state. Ashdown said even if the EPA sheet is
correct, there will likely be farms that don’t currently meet other standards which will be impacted by
these changes. Doyle said he was sorry Negley could not be here, and was sorry to miss the
presentation. He was uncomfortable with this board taking any action without having a better
understanding. How long is there to respond? Not sure, although the timeline might be short as
Farm Bureau indicated there was not enough time to look for collaborators. Other members agreed
they were not prepared to provide a response. Doyle referred to the summary document of what
would and would not be covered, and it sounded pretty good, although we don’t know the other
side. Motion to table by Kehoe, second by Fleming, approved without dissent.
2. Town of Caroline Site Plan Law: Teeter provided an overview of the issue: Ag and Markets and the
County Commissioner have provided comments that urge changes to bring the plan into
compliance with Ag District Law; a response letter from the Town Supervisor indicate none of these
recommendations will be implemented. CAFO’s seem to be the point of contention. Caroline is not
likely to have a regulated CAFO, but this might set a precedent. Sigler asked for clarification; his
understanding is that Ag District Law trumps local law – only if a farmer asks for Ag and Markets’
intervention. Scheffler asked for the board’s recommendation. Motion by Kehoe to send a letter to
the Town urging it to comply with Ag and Markets and County recommendations, seconded by
Specker, approved without dissent.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
3. PDR Request for proposals: Doyle has looked at the material extensively along with the review
criteria and developed a spread sheet with all the information, which he distributed and reviewed.
Teeter mentioned that historically the State has looked for successful, solid operations and that isn’t
even mentioned in the criteria. Doyle concurred, and said there also seems to be far less emphasis
on important soils. He thought the new criteria seem to reflect the state’s negative experiences with
ill-prepared municipalities. He suggests we consider prioritizing the list, and then contact the State
for feedback. The County can probably commit to only one or possibly two. There was discussion
about the increasing value of ag land reducing the gap to development value. Scheffler asked for
clarification on the funding and match – a town is not obligated, but Dryden has made up the
difference in the past, but that’s very rare. When a Town is involved, it’s mostly in-kind. Towns have
expressed support in all cases, but most likely only the towns of Dryden and possibly Ulysses could
apply on their own; all other towns would need support from the County. Scheffler asked what the
board’s role is; Doyle explained we have to provide recommendation letters for any applications
submitted. Roth asked if urgency should play a role, i.e. impending development. Teeter wondered
if protecting a large farm as a way of stabilizing agriculture in an area would make a good
application. Roth reminded the board that larger farms can have their easements written with up to
three subdivisions to allow for flexibility in the future. There was discussion as to whether a lack of
an heir would be a positive or a negative – either, although a lack of heir could be used to clarify the
need for protection. There are also small farms with very good soil resources and locations. All
applications we discussed and compared in detail and at length. Mazourek rose to the top for
everyone, with urging for subdivisions. There was additional discussion for the next two priorities,
Brown was recommended for next year, Reynolds was suggested as number two providing Ulysses
is on board with handling the application with county help. Brown as third, for next year if Groton is
supportive. The Caroline parcels are in a number four position, or a lot could change with Cayuga
Pure. The two Dryden farms will be recommended to work with their town.
Old Business:
1. Ag Plan Update: Members received in advance of the meeting an updated document with draft
goals and summary statements as well as a first draft of moving the goals into a matrix. Roth
suggested we take a look at the themes and summary points to determine if anything is missing.
For example, under Ag Economic Development, is financing and access to money as issue?
Munkenbeck suggested stream buffers be added to the Environment section. Teeter will send a
reminder e-mail to members to think about additions early next week. Also, the new census data is
out, so hopefully we can start updating our data. Roth will send the data to members electronically.
This will go to PAB and June.
Adjourn 8:55 p.m.
Next Meeting: June 25, 2014, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
April 23, 2014
Present: Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek, Jon Negley, Monika Roth,
Ed Scheffler, Don Specker
Excused: John Fleming, Mike Sigler
Liaisons: Mike Ashdown/Dryden Grange
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 7:00 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Davidson had change for item 3; moved by Kehoe, second by Davidson,
approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Davidson: EPA has again proposed changes which will expand their authority, which are believed
would cause problems for municipalities and farmers. Scheffler and Mazourek agreed that this
seems to be the way of other regulatory agencies.
2. Doyle: Has heard a PDR announcement from the state is imminent, perhaps within the next two
weeks. He suggests we first consider those who have expressed interest and/or submitted
application in the past be prioritized first, and also urge the state to release these funds on a more
regular basis, as we have on-going interest in this county. We should probably review the
applications on hand at the next meeting. This is something we need to make sure we cover in the
ag plan update. Davidson wondered how the ranking process works, so divisiveness is avoided.
3. Teeter:
Roy Trask has submitted his resignation, regretfully. He is over-committed with work and
Newfield town board business, and doesn’t think he can contribute here as needed. So, we
have a farmer vacancy. Roy is a field crop grower from Newfield; we currently have two farmers
in Lansing and one in Groton, and we have, in the past, been mindful to try to keep the board
diverse in terms of operations and geography. Suggestions were Dave Buck, Russ Carpenter,
Ray VandeBogart, Switzers, Greg Reynolds, Tor Oeshner, Chaw or Lucy, Amara or Athena
Steinkraus, Steve Eddy, Josh Markley. We can put out a press release. It would be great if we
could find a younger person.
AgStravaganza! was April 12th, and very successful. There was lots of farm equipment this year,
which was a big hit, The Dairy Princess gave out Organic Valley Cheese sticks and Chobani
yogurt, also very popular. We once again had a corn pit, which had five or more toddlers in it
throughout the day. At the end of the day, children actually helped fill the bags back up with the
corn – very cool!
4. Specker: reported he lost a lot of his honey bee hives, and Duane Waid said he’s lost 70% of his
hives, due the severe winter this year. It doesn’t bode well for honey production this year, or even
people continuing in keeping bees.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Ag Plan Updates: Teeter provided copies of the six themes with comments organized under each
summary topic, which were also e-mailed to members. We broke into three groups and each group
worked on two themes to develop draft goal statements. This is what the groups proposed:
o Ag Economic Development: To encourage business development, expansions, and
diversification, promote collaboration and networking, and improve access to support services
and markets necessary for viable farm businesses.
o Future Farmers & Workforce: Create an environment that connects young people interesting in
farming with farming experiences and opportunities that result in future farmers and successful
farm employees.
o Ag Awareness: Develop policies and programs that improve understanding of agriculture and its
relationship to the community and agricultural practices among farmers.
o Local Foods: Pursue a policy which encourages local production, educates farmers and
consumers, and promotes consumption at every level (personal, institutional, etc.).
o Environment: Promote farming practices which protect and manage Tompkins County’s
agricultural lands and associated natural features, supports the health of our community, and
builds resilience in anticipation of changes in climate and environmental challenges in the region
over the long term.
o Land Use Policy & Regulations: Provide a supportive climate for the continuation of diverse
farming through public policies and actions on land use that encourage farming. Such practices
across governments should improve access to farmland for a variety of operations.
Scheffler raised the issue of ongoing, unresolvable disputes between producers around
GMO’s, which exist in crops including corn, soybeans, alfalfa, wheat, grasses, etc. This is
not something we will fix, although he provided an example of how communication between
producers can avoid potential conflicts on a local level. This might belong under a different
topic – perhaps under Ag Awareness, neighbor relations?
Doyle also shared samples of some of the maps we might want to incorporate in the final plan,
which included agricultural lands identified for protection, soil types, land use/land cover, ag
districts, and current PDR programs.
Adjourn 8:50 p.m.
Next Meeting: May 28, 2014, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Addendum:Doyle offered this alternative Goal Statements following the meeting:
Environment
Model and promote sustainable agricultural practices that encourage the protection and management
of Tompkins County's natural features. Such practices assist our region in building resilience with
realities of climate change and environmental challenges over the long term.
Land Use Policy and Regulation
Support diverse farming opportunities through land use public policies and actions that protect
farmland. Such practices, implemented across jurisdictions, should improve access
to farmland and support operations that do not have adverse impacts to other farm operations or the
environment.
■
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
March 26, 2014
Present: Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, John Fleming, Irene Kehoe, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler,
Mike Sigler, Don Specker
Excused: Bob Mazourek, Jon Negley, Roy Trask
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 11:45 p.m.
Introductions: the Board welcomed new members Don Specker and John Fleming, and new County
Legislature representative, Mike Sigler.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Roth, second by Kehoe, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Doyle: Has heard there is a political battle going on in Albany about releasing the PDR funds, the
RFP may be delayed another year. If that turns out to be the case, we need to get this info out to at
least those who have expressed an interest in the program.
2. Sigler: a farmer asked him if they need to apply for ag assessment every year? Kehoe said yes, this
is state law. Because our county has county-wide assessment, farmers have until April 1st to apply;
in other counties farmers need to apply by March 1st. Kehoe covered the basic requirements for
eligibility.
3. Davidson: State has new initiative for new farms, deals with loans, for land, equipment, etc. Good
news for passing down the farm.
4. Teeter:
The board’s vacancy recommendations, Don Specker and John Fleming, have been approved
by the Legislature.
Shared the label from Ithaca Milk, which was a donation for the Ag Summit. This product is
available at smaller groceries in the county.
There is a new Farm Bureau Facebook page; if you have Facebook, please check it out, like it
and share it.
AgStravaganza! is set for April 12th, response so far has been very positive.
5. Roth:
Had her ag committee meeting last night: Mike Griggs shared a bobcat picture he took locally,
also discussion of the devastation of honey bees from winter.
There is a new Dairy Specialist for our five-county region.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
•
•
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Ag Summit Evaluation:
o About 70 people attended, fully half were farmers.
o Good, but sometimes meandering, conversations during the breakout sessions.
o Doyle reported a call from an ag land owner wondering how/when people like him would have a
chance to weigh in on the plan.
o The Young Farmer panel was well-received; it’s interesting that Albany may be addressing
some of the concerned the expressed. It was good mix of people, some with clear access to
land and others without.
o Timing seemed to really work; morning, with breakfast. Might want to look at other locations for
future meetings, as we do get a heavier attendance from the east side of the lake, especially
Dryden. There might also be fewer, larger operators on the west-side of the lake. Ithaca might
be a good idea.
o This is a good opportunity for farmers to talk and also get some pertinent information. Do we
need to do it annually? There is a lot of information that comes to farmers in other ways, i.e.
newsletters, - are there enough topics? We’ve been changing themes each year. The point of a
“summit” is it is all-encompassing: all enterprises as well as local representatives. Post ag plan
update, could be a tool for implementation.
2. Ag Plan Updates: Doyle: need to also analyze ag land and businesses: what is it and where is it? Is
it important, is it at risk? Forestland info is important. Relationship between ARFAs and land
mapping. There are some town maps as well. CCE is working with a grad student to work on maps.
There has been a real tightening up of land availability around the county; a lot of land is rented.
When we ask land owners their future plans, it’s mostly they will stay in farming. Issue may now be
smaller farms getting squeezed out of the rental market due to increasing rental rates. The following
are specific comments about the Ag Plan Update:
We need a Goals Statement for each theme.
We have a lot of the census data for analyses.
Will need to prioritize, what’s most important, but also what’s easier.
Need something understandable for the public to react to.
There is some historic information, maps that discussed where farming in the future would go,
and it was pretty accurate. This might be interesting to include.
Lease of development rights is of interest; if we want to get into this, we need to have a plan or
program. Massachusetts may have a program we could review.
Infrastructure: Salvage yards stay in place, how likely will we get equipment dealers in the
county?
Internet, roads and bridges, fencing, power, culverts under roads for livestock crossing.
Understanding Farm Bill and existing programs. Are farmers forward-looking enough to plan for
potential problems, i.e. reducing the CAFO number requirements, fuel tanks, etc. Strategic
planning for the future. Funded programs seem to be over-engineered-more costly, but if you do
it yourself you are liable if it fails.
DEC: has been more responsive, but with larger fields it’s easy to miss damage until it’s too
late. Can’t raise fruits or vegetables without a fence. Can get more deer out of season than in
season, because when the hunting pressure is on they know where to go.
3. Farmer Data Base: copies of the data base were circulated for members to review and help fill in
the blanks.
Adjourn 1:00 p.m.
Next Meeting: April 23, 2014, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
January 22, 2014
Present: Lin Davidson, Jon Negley, Monika Roth, Roy Trask, Ed Scheffler
Excused: Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek
Associates: Nancy Munkenbeck
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 11;45 p.m.
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Trask, second by Davidson, approved without dissent.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Announcements:
1. Negley:
Provided the board with a letter from the SWCD chair authorizing him to fill the SWCD seat.
Also, Dan Carey is the new chair of the SWCD board.
Governor has announced funding for BMPs, water quality.
Some discussion about DEC TMDL’s investigation: looking at phosphorus in south end of
Cayuga Lake, goal seems to be to having swimming at the south end of the lake restored. Ag
needs to be involved in these conversations. Roth added that in Tompkins County there are not
a lot of row crops in general, especially close to steams. Munkenbeck reminded us that the
ecosystem uses things that are in the stream as water travels. Roth said there is a lot that
comes out of leaves, and we have a lot of them and there is no leaf pick up program.
2. Davidson:
AgStravaganza! date is Saturday, April 12th. Tent cost is quite high due to the need to secure it
with water barrels rather than stakes.
3. Teeter:
Circulated notice from NYS of $500,000 available for towns to amend laws that might be
unreasonably restrictive for agriculture. Scheffler mentioned hearing some grumbling about
zoning in Lansing; Davidson provided an historical overview. Roth said there is another meeting
for the Lansing Ag Plan on the 28th. There is some confusion on what the plan is, i.e. a guidance
document, not a set of laws.
Farm Show tickets are available on the front counter if anyone would like them.
4. Roth:
Farm Business Management Conference series for Farm Women: Annie’s Project.
Regional Small Farm conference brochures distributed.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Board Vacancies:
Land Preservation Seat: Debbie reported Andy Zepp, Director of the Land Trust, suggested one
of their board members, Don Specker, fill this seat. Roth endorsed this recommendation,
pending receipt of application, and this recommendation be forwarded to the County
Legislature, Davidson seconded approved without dissent.
There are three applicants for the farmer vacancy: John Fleming and Keith Chapin from Walnut
Ridge and Karl Stauderman from Deep Water Farm. All are dairy, but we did not have
applicants from other sectors. We currently do not have any representation from large dairy;
Roth suggested John Flemming as he seems to rise to the top in terms of his completion of the
Lead NY, and track record of participation in local meetings; he has a reputation for following
through on commitments. In the past we’ve prioritized and can do this again; Davidson moved
John be recommended, Negley seconded. Approved without dissent. Teeter will forward to
legislature and notify other applicants and invite them to be associate members.
We need to follow-up on a county legislator appointment and PEEQ representative.
Letter to Ulysses: Munkenbeck said Town Boards are happy to act on things that are easy, so
perhaps include a list of farmers willing to serve. We can ask who might be interested from the
original committee and/or offer to facilitate a meeting to identify potential members. Add to the
letter a suggestion to ask original members if willing to serve. Davidson moved letter be sent as
amended, Roth seconded, approved without dissent. Teeter will update letter and e-mail it to
Scheffler for final approval.
2. Ag Plan Updates: Next step is Ag Summit. Data analysis has been done to the extent possible,
waiting for new census data in March or April. WE have been working on sector descriptions in
preparation for writing Ag profiles.
3. Ag Summit Planning: We are hopeful the breakfast format will work for farmers. The topic areas
we’d like to cover are: Economic Development, Local Foods, Land Use Policy, Ag Awareness,
Resources, Environmental Quality, and the Next Generation of farmers. Table break outs with note
taker, panel of young farmers (1 hr), break out (1 hr). Focus of panel was intended to be on young
farmers. Speaker possibilities: Lindsay Wickam/Farm Bill. What would young farmers like to see
here to keep them here rather than going somewhere else – what impediments do they see. Keith
Chapin, Space’s vet’s, Kenny Quick/FFA; Devon, Melissa, Karl or Mark Stauderman, Josh Markley,
Jason Carpenter. Is this your future vs what is your future?
New Business
1. Farm City Day: Teeter announced this year’s host is the Fouts’ Farm on Rt 222 in Groton. The farm
actually straddles the border with Cortland, so she is working with Heather Birdsall from CCE-
Cortland to plan and coordinate the event. There has been one meeting at the farm and lots of
ideas generated. The tentative date is Saturday, August 9th; this date will be confirmed at the next
meeting with the farm. Nancy livestock league, ask about other animals.
Adjourn 1:38 p.m.
Next Meeting: Ag Summit at the VFW in Dryden: February 26, 2014, 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
•
•
•
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
December 11, 2013
Present: Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek, Frank Proto, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler
Excused: Lin Davidson, Jon Negley, Roy Trask
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Guests: John Fleming, Karl Stauderman
Call to Order 12:00 p.m.
Introductions
Members and guests introduced themselves.
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Doyle, second by Mazourek, approved without dissent.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Announcements:
1. Doyle:
Had a good PDR discussion at the recent meeting, although still no news from the State; he
received correspondence for the Town of Caroline committing their support for interested farms
in that town, and also several people spoke to him after the meeting. They are very close to
closing on the Sherman/Jerry Dell farm; the Town of Dryden committed some funds towards the
project, at the urging of the Town Ag Committee.
2. Teeter:
Circulated several correspondences from NYS Ag and Markets: one a copy of a letter from Ron
Mead providing information to the Town of Ulysses to help them address a neighbor complaint
about a farming operations; another a copy of a letter of approval for the Town of Ulysses Ag
Plan; and the final one a letter approving the continuation of Ag District #1. Proto asked for
clarification on the Ulysses matter; Teeter explained a sheep farm had some moveable electric
fence around a pasture in front of their house and a couple times sheep had gotten out of that
enclosure and bothered the neighbors. The farm has agreed not to use that pasture until the
fence is upgraded, but they may still need to appear in front of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
She also has the DEIS for the Black Oak Wind Farm on CD, if anyone would like to borrow it.
3. Proto:
This is a slow month for the Legislature, but there is discussion about what committees will
continue for next year; there may be a change in the committee this board reports to. The
County budget was approved since we last met. The State Blue Ribbon committee he serves on
will meet again in February, and he will come back and provide an update.
4. Roth:
Announced the beginning of the Land Link program and described it – how to link land with
farmers. A web site is being designed; it will be a web-based program. Extension hears from
people looking for land to farm and also people with land wondering what to do with it, and this
will hopefully help.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
•
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Board Vacancies:
Jon Negley will be filling the Soil and Water Conservation District Chair’s seat, pending a letter
of approval from the Director [ex-officio seat].
Pryor was the liaison from the Planning committee, one of the committees that may change; it
will be important to advocate for a replacement. Sometimes committee seats go unfilled
because legislators aren’t interested, can’t make meetings, or are over-committed. The Board
asked Doyle to let them know which committee we will report to so we can request a liaison.
We have an application from Zack Odell from the Finger Lakes Land Trust to fill the Land
Preservation organization seat, but he doesn’t live in the county. We will defer action until the
January meeting for clarification on residency requirements.
We have three to four people interested in filling the farmer seat vacancy. Applications are still
coming in, so we will consider all applications at the January meeting.
Two applicants were at this meeting and were offered the opportunity to ask questions. John
Fleming asked what sort of things the Board does – review Notice of Intent (proposed
infrastructure through an ag district), ag district reviews, farmer-neighbor/town conflicts, public
issues, Ag Data Statements (for development in an ag district) [which led to discussion about
what the board should be reviewing in relation to subdivision and site plan reviews], PDR
application review and prioritizing. John also asked who members get up to speed; there are
some documents that will help.
2. 2014 Officers: Scheffler was nominated for chair by Roth, second by Kehoe; Mazourek was
nominated for vice chair by Doyle, second Kehoe. Proto moved the nominations be closed and that
the secretary cast one vote for those nominated. Approved without dissent.
3. Ag Plan Updates:
A summary from the recent PDR/Ag Plan meeting were distributed. Roth explained comments
were made using the major themes that have been distilled from earlier farmer input. These are:
Policy, Ag Awareness and Education, Local Food, Ag Development and Marketing, and
Environment. Input has been gathered from numerous focus groups and we are ready to
categorize specific suggestions under the appropriate themes. These suggestions/comments
can then be used to develop goals under each theme, and then goals can be prioritized (high,
medium, low) and action steps identified. There will be things that the board or county will not be
able to address. We will have this ready for the Ag Summit.
Roth said the State wants to see concrete action for ag economic development.
One of the comments that resonated was that we need to lower the average age of farmers, i.e.
look for new paths to farm ownership for young people. Roth suggested this could be a panel
during the Summit, focusing on how young people get into operation, how to find young farmers
–are they out there? This question may be more engaging for the general public, as well.
Teeter provided two spreadsheets on ag land data for board members to review, one of
farmland she’s still working to identify who works it, the other an abbreviation of the master list.
She’s is looking for help with the shorter list, and if members notice errors on the larger one,
please let her know. Kehoe suggested she work Barbara Just in the Assessment Office, as she
is the person who works with ag assessment.
4. Ag Summit Planning: We will pick topics from Ag Plan, provide an overview of each and follow with
breakout sessions. One suggestion is a panel discussion of outside factors that impact the ability to
pass down the farm (i.e. estate planning). The date will be our regular February meeting, the 26th.
We will have a breakfast meeting at the Dryden VFW, with the breakfast at 9:00 a.m. followed by
the meeting from 9:30 to 12:30. The will be a planning meeting in early January; Roth, Teeter,
Kehoe, and Scheffler volunteered. Proto suggested we include an update on the county
comprehensive plan update. We need to think about people who can speak to economic
development, future of farming.
5. Attendance: With two vacancies and new legislative members coming on board in January, it is
really important that members attend meetings. We barely made quorum this month, and we have
lots of important work ahead of us. Scheffler will help remind member of meetings.
6. Town Ag Plan Follow-up: Roth reported there is concern among Ulysses farmers that although the
Town Ag Plan was adopted a year or so ago, an Ag Committee has not yet been appointed. She
suggested the Board send a letter to the Town Supervisor urging she move forward on this. Teeter
will prepare a draft for the board to review at the January meeting.
Adjourn 1:38 p.m.
Next Meeting: January 22, 2014, 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
October 23, 2013
Present:Scott Doyle, Bob Mazourek, Zack Odell, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler, Roy Trask
Excused:Lin Davidson, Irene Kehoe, Jon Negley, Frank Proto
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Guests: Adam Buck, Dave Buck
Call to Order 7:11 p.m.
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Mazourek, second by Trask, approved without dissent.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Announcements:
1. Kehoe (by e-mail):
NYS Ag Assessment Bill: limiting the amount of annual ag assessment value change (set by NYS) to 2%
down from current 10% has passed the Senate and the Assembly and was delivered to the Governor on
October 9th. Her office hasn’t heard anything yet. Members heard the governor did sign it.
2. Doyle:
Nothing new officially from Ag and Markets on PDR, working to finishing the annual monitoring of existing
easements.
3. Roth:
County Assessment provided update on where county fire taxes are and are not receiving the fire tax
exemption, Danby resident are talking to fire commissioners there to approve the exemption.
4. Teeter:
Introduced Adam Buck, the new vice president of Tompkins County Farm Bureau.
Old Business:
1. Board Vacancies:
Jon Negley will be filling the Soil and Water Conservation District Chair’s seat, pending a letter of
approval from the Director. [ex-officio seat]
Zack Odell is the Land Trust staff member who replaced David Diaz; he would like to fill the Land
Preservation Organization seat on the Board left vacant when Diaz left. [term ends 12/16]
Teeter reported Crispell contacted her to say she couldn’t make the last or this meeting, and really needs
to step back. Her husband is requiring more care, and she thinks it’s time to fill her seat with another
farmer. [term ends 12/16] Doyle suggested we review past applications, ask Nancy Munkenback, Chaw
or Lucy Chang was suggested, Trevor or Monika Sherman, Russ Beck, Walnut Ridge, Pete Larsen, Carl
Stauderman, Cal Snow.
There are no other terms expiring at the end of 2013
2. 2014 Officers: The Board needs to nominate and vote on officers at the last meeting of the year, which should
be December meeting.
3. Ag Plan Updates:
Data Gathering: Roth showed several of the charts that have been developed from Ag Census data. The
2012 data is not yet available, but is very important to this process – we will probably not go much further
until that is released. However, even in 2007, it’s clear agriculture in Tompkins County is growing – more
farms and bigger farms. Trask noted soybeans appear to be absent from data, may have been missed, or
may have gotten bigger since 2007. Some numbers seem out of whack and need a closer look, but
generally this is a solid start. Now shifting gears to start compiling Sector Profiles, with the following
sectors identified:
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
o Dairy: two subsets, organic and conventional (may split conventional by size…sm, med, lg)
o Field Crops: two subsets, organic and conventional
o Vegetables & fruit (tree fruits & berries)
o Small Livestock: three subsets: sheep & goats, pigs, and poultry
o Large Livestock: beef
o Nursery/greenhouse
o Equine
o Honey
o Forestry (inc maple)
o Specialty items: mushrooms? Other?
Roth asked members what should we be including in the sector profiles: most recent activity, regional
comparisons, size of farms, conversations we’ve already had around farming, interest in 2012 data –
think there are big changes to be reflected in that data, data by town would also be very helpful – we
should be able to provide this data at least in some ways.
She has been talking to Sharon Heller in County Planning about map making and what we are likely to
need in support of the plan. One map shows the amount of land rented is about equal to land owned;
farmers may not be able to or want to buy? Trask said it’s hard to find a lender to work with; Farm Credit
East has a lot of hoops to jump through. Scheffler said a lot of the land being sold is going to the really big
operations. We are trying to get a Land Link program started so landowners can find farmers and vice
versa. Roth wondered about a letter to the editor about considering the local farmer rather than someone
out-of-county. Scheffler said when you are considering selling your farm you want it to stay in farming,
you don’t necessarily want to take a risk on someone who might sell out in a few years. Trask said he’s
had land he rented sold for development, but farmers have everything tied up in their land and that’s their
resource when they need to cash out and retire.
Focus Group Comments Summary: Teeter provided the latest summary, which included Board comments
from the last meeting and has been summarized and grouped by category.
o Kehoe, who could not be here, sent by e-mail the following:
How do we get people to apply for agricultural exemptions? There are still farmers who do not
apply.
The Dept of Assessment constantly gets questioned on who wants to rent land (especially if a
property owner has had an increase in their assessment) - right now we tell them to call you
(CCE) is there some way we could coordinate CCE with our ag person (Barb Just) so there can
be some kind of list share??
There needs to be more education for large land owners that rent land - not just farmers working
their own land - on ag assessments/exemptions. It is confusing to folks whose income is looked
at for eligibility of the exemptions.
o Roth: policy section might be good – pull out of “Regulatory” – cross sector; taxes – what can we do
on the tax front? Neighbor/Town relations come up frequently – rural communities need farmers in
town government positions. Are there concerns about energy, interest in alternative energy? Scheffler
said Organic Valley has a full-time person helping farms with this – writing grants, etc. Are there
emerging pest problems, maybe due to weather changes?
o Trask: marketing is one of the biggest challenges across the board, regardless of operation type,
time-consuming, watching markets constantly, markets disappear, people don’t pay for what you sold
them, etc. Land use and the change in land use is a big challenge
o Doyle: resilience also comes up frequently: climate shift, for example – consider by sector,
projections?
o Scheffler: each sector is treated in isolation, but many farms are diversified
New Business:
1. November meeting: Ag Plan Farmer meeting, 11/20, 7-9, at 4-H Acres; will also cover PDR update – this will
take the place of the regular November meeting
2. December meeting date: 12/11, 11:30-1:00, if it works
3. Ag Summit planning:
o Adam mentioned the re-fit of AES, and the potential impacts to agriculture of pipeline installation
o Highlight the Ag Plan, with one or two other topics, and burning issues or speakers? Need to start crafting
some key recommendations for the plan, which could be reviewed; also, there will be maps and charts,
graphs, etc.
o Date: late February, early March? Weekday, maybe Friday?
o Trask said that’s prime maple syrup season - maybe a pancake lunch? Bacon, sausage?
Adjourn 8:47 p.m.;Next Meeting: November 20, 2013, 7:00 to 9:00 p.m.
•
•
•
►
►
►
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
September 25, 2013
Present: Rachel Crispell, Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek,
Jon Negley, Frank Proto, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler
Excused: Rachel Crispell, Roy Trask
Guests: Nancy Munkenbeck
Call to Order 7:05 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Proto, second by Kehoe, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1) Proto:
a) The County budget process has started. Two budget meetings have been held; the public
budget forum is October 17 and the final budget hearing is November 12. Roth will send
information on funding for the AFPB to board members.
b) Introduced Jon Negley, the new Soil & Water District Manager, who will be filling the SWCD
Board chair seat, which is a voting member seat. We need a letter from SWCD Board Chair to
make this official.
2) Doyle:
a) The County is updating the Comprehensive Plan; they are seeking input though a community-
wide survey.
b) NYS has indicated there will be funding for PDR available soon; we may want to host an
informational meeting on this topic. Roth also mentioned there will be funding for implementing
ag plan strategies – we will want to announce this; TC-COG was suggested.
3) Davidson:
a) The Farm Bureau Annual Meeting is Friday, October 18 at 6:30, at the Dryden VFW. Make
reservation with Debbie Teeter, dlt22@cornell.edu. The guest speaker is Dawn George, ag
teacher at George Junior, and a couple of her FFA members.
4) Roth:
a) The Dryden Ag Committee has been inquiring about submitting a grant to develop a town Ag
Plan. Alos, work on the Lansing Ag Plan is nearing completion, she expects it to be finished by
the end of the year.
New Business
1) Board Vacancy: Sice Daiz left, the Land Preservation Specialist seat has been vacant. We need to
follow-up with FLLT. Doyle will follow up with FLLT about a recommendation for the board.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 WiHow Avenue I thaca, New York 14850
Telephone (60 7) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economic:ally viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1) Focus Group Summary: Reviewed input from Focus Group meetings. There was very low
attendance so the information may not be reflective of farmers within the particular ag sector we
were targeting. Board members reviewed the summary and provided comments (see updated
Focus Group notes).
General AFPB comments:
Marketing opportunities need attention across sectors
Infrastructure needs attention
Organic dairy and organic crop are different from Conventional dairy & crops so we should get
separate input
Need for general information and education about programs, services, etc.
Animal health seems like an important topic to address
Need to develop industry profiles that characterize the sector, size, etc.
Farm succession as an important issue
Look for themes across each area and compile
And get more input on unique industry needs from more producers
ARFA meeting feedback – are any of the actions recommended in the ARFA process…that
might be included in Ag Plan. – Go thru the document and look for common themes that came
up in each ARFA.
Under county wide action – design guidelines: Munkenbeck mentioned the Dryden design
guidelines might be a good think to look at.
Water resources – Proto mentioned that Aquifer studies are still lacking in some areas.
General observations about information that needs to be shared: buffers, Ag Assessment and
Leasing land (sample leases), finding land to rent (Land Link)
For the Agenda next time:
Review terms expiring and vacancies
Next Meeting – Oct. 23, 2013
Adjourn 9:00 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, October 23th, 7:00 p.m.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
June 26, 2013
Present:Rachel Crispell, Lin Davidson Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Frank Proto,
Ed Scheffler
Excused:Bob Mazourek, Monika Roth, Roy Trask
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 7:00 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Kehoe, second by Crispell, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Teeter:
a. All five Farm City stops are confirmed (one tentatively) and publicity has begun: Glenwood
Farms, Indian Creek Fruit Farm, Laughing Goat Fiber Farm, Farmer Ground Flour, and
Wideawake Bakery (tentative). She will call a planning meeting soon to start working on overall
and site specific logistics.
b. Circulated great thank you letters from Trumansburg first graders who visited the Gunning
family’s Spring Weather farm in Enfield. This was the first visit to that farm, and it went really
well. This farm milks Jerseys, which are smaller and therefore less intimidating than Holsteins.
The farm also had chickens, goats, a piglet, a pony, and two draft horses, all of which the
children could see and most they could touch. Also tried two new activities, both from the Food,
Land and People curriculum: one taught about pollination, with some of the children
representing apple trees in bloom and others representing bees, and the other taught about soil
percolation, with the children representing different types of soil molecules (sand, silt, or clay)
and the teachers representing water molecules trying to move through the soil.
2. Doyle:
1. AEEP, NYSERDA fund, foa ag properties, circulated..
2. A 2% annual tax cap on ag assessment values has been approved by State Assembly and
Senate and is now waiting for the Governor to sign it.
3. Proto:
a. Eric Smith’s (Cayuga Pure Organics) barn burned; replacement cost is over $238,000. There is
an on-line fundraising campaign through indiegogo (www.igg.me/at/cpo). He wondered if CEE
can help get the word out about this - Teeter thought they already have, but will double check.
b. Craig Schutt has retired as District Manager of Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation
District; Les Travis from Yates County is serving as interim District Manager. Other staff remains
in place. A Search is to begin shortly.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 WiHow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage fanning in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow fanners to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Focus Group Summary: Teeter distributed a document of all comments collected so far, by Ag
Sector. There is a wide margin on the right side for member comment, and any comments they
might get from other ag folks they run into. She encouraged members to read through the
comments and think about them, and then over the summer take note of anything helpful from
conversations they might have with farmers.
Ag Plan: Several, weeks ago, members received summaries of the original Ag Plan and the work
done in 2006. Since the 2006 work was done based on the original document and work completed
since that time, Proto and Doyle suggested going through the 2006 document. Doyle led the
discussion while Teeter typed comments into the 2006 document. This new document with
comments will accompany the minutes of this meeting.
Adjourn 9:00 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, September 25th, 7:00 p.m.
2.
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
May 5, 2013
Present:Rachel Crispell, Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Frank Proto, Monika Roth,
Ed Scheffler
Liaisons: Mike Ashdown/Dryden Grange, Pat Pryor/County Legislature
Excused:Bob Mazourek, Roy Trask, Lin Davidson
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 7:06 p.m.
Additions to the Agenda: none
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Proto, second by Doyle, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Teeter:
Attended a very good workshop about hosting farm visits. She got a few new ideas, as well as
some resources – including the lawn signs on display at the meeting.
Spoke with Glenwood farms, the bison farm, about being a host site for Farm City Day and they
would love to be included.
Spoke with Les Travis, Interim SWCD Manager, and is now sending him meeting minutes and
agendas. They will be appointing someone to attend these meetings as soon as possible.
2. Doyle:
They have a new staff person, Megan McDonald, who we will likely interact with at some point.
3. Roth:
There is a meeting tomorrow night for municipalities to share what they are doing related to
agriculture.
4. Proto:
The Legislature passed resolutions at last night’s meeting to departmental heads re: budget
expectations; 4% increase, which will mean departments need to cut about .5% to achieve a
$200,000 savings. There is some flexibility from department and department. There was
discussion about TCAT bus service and the possibilities of raising fares.
Clean Water Act follow-up: as of now, this issue is not being pursued.
As of January 1st everyone will need to have health insurance; farmers need to be aware of
opportunities available to them.
5. Pryor:
If anyone would like high speed internet and have not contacted Clarity Connect, they should do
so at once. The areas with most interest shown will be the first served. Cost will be $35-$45
depending on package.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Committee Reporting: The following are the responsibilities of the two committees that used to be
PDEQ:
Planning, Energy and Environmental Quality Committee responsibilities: Planning Department,
MPO, TCAT, SWCD, Flood Control/Water Quality, EMC, WRC, AFPB, Land Management
Economic Development Committee responsibilities: Workforce Development, Tompkins County
Area Development (EDC Collaborative), Industrial Development Agency, TC3 workforce programs,
Chamber of commerce, Tourism Program, CVB, Strategic Tourism Planning Board, Ithaca
Downtown Partnership, Community Celebrations and Arts, County Historian.
PEEQ is probably correct for most AFPB business, but we should also report to EDC on matters
pertaining to Economic Development or Business and Industry. (Karen Fuller would be the contact)
2. Focus Group Summary: A summary of the notes for meetings was distributed and reviewed. There
was a question about planning for ag in emergencies. Roth mentioned Jim Octerski’s work on this
issue. Teeter mentioned the issues faced by farmers during the recent floods
3. Ag Plan: there is a 3-page summary of the 2006 work which can be e-mailed or mailed to members
along with the original plan information; members will review this for discussion at the next (June)
meeting. Most likely we will not meet in July and August and instead interested members can attend
Farm City Day planning meetings. In September we will continue work on the ag plan update.
New Business
1. Doyle reported both Teeter and he attended a meeting last week in Auburn to talk about town and
county ag plans: what folks are doing, problems encountered, plans of work, etc. John Brennan,
from NYS Ag and Markets, was a featured speaker. There was good discussion of the approaches
people are taking. They were reminded of the diversity of ag in our county, and the need to ask the
question “What is ag?” There is a need to continue to identify and be aware of the different types of
ag operations in our county.
Adjourn 8:10 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, June 26th, 7:00 p.m.
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
April 24, 2013
Present:Rachel Crispell, Lin Davidson, Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Frank Proto,
Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler, Craig Schutt
Liaisons: Pat Pryor/County Legislature
Excused:David Diaz, Bob Mazourek, Roy Trask
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Guest: Marguerite Wells, Black Oak Wind Farm, LLC
Call to Order 7:00 p.m.
Presentation: Marguerite Wells, Black Oak Wind Farm, LLC
Marguerite was introduced; she mentioned she is also a farmer –she has a nursery in Enfield. She is here
to review the project, as is required. They have not yet submitted their draft GEIS to the Enfield town board, but
will do this shortly. At that point the official review process will begin. She wanted to come this evening to talk
about potential agricultural impact. The AFPB is an “interested” agency vs. an “involved” agency. The project
began eight years ago, and she got involved six years ago; there have been many revisions, and the final plan is
for seven turbines. The turbines are also smaller than the original plan, but not noticeably. The project will provide
the equivalent of the power needs of 4000 households. They are talking to large local and regional entities to buy
the power. This project is unique in that wind farms are typically owned by large corporations. This is a
community-owned project with 84 local investors.
Ag Land impacts: four turbines will be on active farmland. Siting is directed not just by wind but land
owner preferences. Turbines and access lanes are sited in cooperation with the landowners. There is only one
place where collection lines do not follow laneways (referenced map). Collection lines are buried four feet down
and can be farmed right over. The same with turbine bases, which are back-filled. Proto asked about security and
emergency response. These issues are covered in the SEQR; they are working with the Enfield Fire Department
on protocols. The Town law is well-written to make sure the Town is not left holding the financial bag. The
turbines’ access doors are secure; there have been no appreciable vandalism to turbines elsewhere. There are
occasional turbine failures, but the biggest danger is lightning strikes causing grass fires. For this reason, they
have chosen turbines with the highest lightening protection. They also chose the quietest. If there are any
additional questions, please contact Marguerite at EnfieldEnergy@gmail.com.
Additions: Clean Water Act, Ethics Policy
Approval of Minutes: Month should read “March”; Moved by Proto, second by Kehoe, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Teeter:
Circulated a letter from Bob Somers, Ag and Markets regarding the Danby Water District.
She received confirmation that Davidson was approved to fill the board vacancy by the County
Legislature.
2. Roth:
A group of local folks have come together to talk about food with the intention of highlighting community-
level activities around local food and agriculture. The hope is to get different community groups with the
same or similar purpose working together. The group has been meeting since last November, and is
largely driven by non-farmers.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Fann/and Protection Board shall be to encourage fanning in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow fanners to operate economically viable enterprises.
2. Kehoe:
Ulysses recently approved the use of ag exemption ceiling when determining fire and ambulance district
tax on land eligible for ag assessment.
Old Business:
1. Farm City Day Planning: A small group met this afternoon to review and discuss the list of Tompkins County
farms and identify potential hosts. The focus was on the west side of the lake, with the bison farm being a real
draw. There is another interesting new ag operation in the area: Farmer Ground Flour’s new mill. Also,
Regional Access is nearby and may offer the opportunity to showcase local foods. The trail could be rounded
out by one of several vegetable farms in the area. An alternative route could be developed in Caroline, if this
one doesn’t work out. There was also a discussion about how to recruit new members to the committee.
Several names were suggested, and also possibly putting out a press release.
2. Lansing Ag Committee: Roth reported the committee is considering creating a new Ag Zone and moving
some land from the Rural Ag (RA) into it. This is a major change, and would be a recommendation to the
town. Also, there is a concern that some large farms are buying up land in the RA and in some places
bumping up against residential property (some owned by absentee landlords). Residents are not even sure
who to talk to when there’s a concern, and smaller farmers are worried they are getting squeezed out. Teeter
wondered if the project Sharon Heller, from County Planning, is working on could identify potential land for
farming. Doyle added some ag landowners are actually making choices to sell for less to a smaller farm.
Crispell said smaller farms are beginning to think the big guys are just getting too big. The hope is to wrap up
and have the draft plan ready to present soon. Davidson agrees; there are problems, but there don’t seem to
be any easy answers. Roth said we are moving into a different time in agriculture, which probably started ten
years ago but the impact is being seen now. Crispell said the increasing demand of the larger farms for feed
has kept her son in business, growing crops to supply them. Schutt mentioned the 100-year study of dairying
in Dryden might provide some insight on trends.
New Business:
1. Ethics Policy: Proto reported the County is starting to review a draft revision of the current Ethics Policy
Standard of Conduct for County Employees. There is a section of that which would impact the AFPB: all
advisory board volunteers will need to provide information about potential conflicts of interest and other
information they might consider personal. He urges members to go to the County web site and review the
draft revisions. Pryor said staff have not yet had a chance to review and provide input. The reason for the
revision is the Standards of Conduct section of the existing policy is not in compliance with State regulations.
Pryor will forward information to Teeter and she will forward.
2. Clean Water Act: Proto reported that concerns in the last couple years about onerous changes to the Clean
Water Act may be proposed again. This board made a recommendation to the legislature on this issue last
year and should be prepared to act again if necessary.
3. Assessment Update: The Informal Review Process has been completed. The majority of farmers who came in
understood it once they saw the computations. The people with real issues were ag land owners who have
never applied for the ag exemption. The Final Role will be compiled shortly and towns will be holding
grievance sessions with local boards of review.
4. Ag Plan Update: Roth said we need to figure out how to make sure this board is involved in this process. She
has a student for the summer to work on the data. There are many other plans that have been completed
since this plan was written which need to be reviewed for inclusion. She referred to the work the AFPB did in
2006, which resulted in some very good strategies. Some have been accomplished and some have changed.
These need to be reviewed, but should the board review these before or after focus groups? There were
three major goals initially: Ag Economic Development, Ag Awareness, Supportive Govt/Land Use Policies. In
2006 we added Environmental Stewardship. She would like to add “growing the local food sector” as a
separate goal, and the “energy area” – should these be focuses or not? What are the major themes we want
to see in the update? Proto suggested keeping the three and expanding as Roth suggested. There was
discussion about the growth and dimensions of local food production and purchase. It was suggested this be
the focus of the next meeting.
Focus Group questions: what makes your operation successful, what are impediments and challenges,
what do see as future impediments, how keep their farm and sector viable, what can local govt do to support
their sector. We know the timing is not ideal, but we are doing the best we can. In addition to direct contact
with farmers we have done media outreach. Ag support industry operations were also suggested for inclusion.
Adjourn 8:55 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, May 22th, 7:00 p.m.
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
March 27, 2013
Present:Rachel Crispell, Lin Davidson, David Diaz, Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek,
Frank Proto, Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler
Excused:Scott Doyle, Roy Trask, Craig Schutt
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 11:40 p.m.
Additions: Ag Land Revaluation, PEEQ vs. Economic Development, both under new business
Approval of Minutes:. Moved by Kehoe, second by Mazourek, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Teeter:
Sharon Heller from County Planning contacted Roth and her to say she’s re-doing the Land
Use/Land Cover maps and it looks like there is more land being farmed than the last time this
was done in 2007. She’s about 75% done, so we might have specific information for the next
meeting. She also said this information will help identify land potentially available for farming.
Davidson said Rob Gallinger, NRCS, has some very detailed maps of crops grown.
She has been approached by Monica Sherman (Ithaca Organics/Jerry Dell Farm) about
coordinating a visit to JerryDell for 180 Dewitt middle school students. Assuming Boynton
continues with this program, all ICSD 7th graders will have a dairy farm visit experience.
2. Davidson:
AgStravaganza! will be Saturday April 6th, 10-4, mostly inside but there will be big equipment
outside. He has some posters if anyone can help distribute them.
Tomorrow he’s going to Albany for an Ag and Markets farmland protection program update;
everyone is hoping for another round of funding.
3. Roth: reported she participated in the Lansing Ag meeting last night, main issue discussed was the
development of an Ag Zone from a subset of land currently in the RA (rural ag) zone. This was a
preliminary discussion. There was good turnout and good participation.
4. Proto:
Hydrilla Update: Task force is ready to go again, planning another treatment in the lake. People
still being pulled together, but there is a new program manager, James Balyszak. Research is
being done on several area creeks entering the lake which appear to dispel the suggestion that
agriculture is responsible for lake problems. There are concerns that dredging may bring up
problems, including hydrilla, which is almost eradicated. Looking at the phosphorus in the lake,
which type it is and where it may be coming from. We might want to invite the researcher, Steve
Penningroth of the Community Science Institute, to speak at one of our meetings.
Asked whatever happened to Farm Bureau’s Food Check Out Week. Davidson explained there
has not been the buy-in needed from local grocers, and money is actually more needed by the
Food Bank of the Southern Tier than food donations. TC Farm Bureau has been making cash
donations more recently. Proto mentioned the lines at the food pantries are longer than ever.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
•
•
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Fann/and Protection Board shall be to encourage fanning in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow fanners to operate economically viable enterprises.
5. Diaz: His last day with the Land Trust will be May 10
th; he is perusing an education and career in
viticulture. This seat is the land preservation expert, and the Land Trust staff has done a good job in
on the board. The Land Trust is conducting a search to fill the position right now.
Old Business:
1. Ag Summit: A summary of evaluation comments were distributed and discussed. There is an Open
House at the Snow Farm on April 6th, may be invitation only. Teeter mentioned the comment about
not using compostable materials; often these materials are used at events and wind up in the
regular waste stream. Davidson wondered about the comment “Individual farm planning that’s
realistic & supports community goals”, not sure what this means. Assessment presentation was
most popular. Scheffler mentioned the Ag Tourism Summit, better signage supported and allowed.
This information will be useful for planning next year. Attendance was good, had a good turnout
from municipal officials, but not the county legislature. Next year we will try to plan around standing
and special committees, and also provide a special invite. We will get on this earlier next year.
2. Farm City Day Planning: Teeter explained the purpose of Farm City Day. Members brain-stormed
possible hosts: Mazourek farms is a feed mill, Bucky VanPelt, Farmer Ground Flour Mill, Beck’s
Farm, Brian Magee, Ratbag Farm, Hardie’s, Scheffler’s, Snow’s cheese plant, Veg operations,
Ithaca Organics, Stick and Stone, West Haven, Thompson farm, Purdy’s, Suwinski, Matt Dedrick
(sunflowers, pellets, farm stand), Jeff Cook, Six Mile Creek, Jackson’s Vineyard. Scheffler
suggested bringing other producers/direct markers to the host sites. Mazourek asked about a date.
3. Ag Focus Groups: Teeter reported this is on track, she’s working on an overall agricultural operation
database. Market Growers turnout was dismal, but Roth expects we can gather information from
this groups in other ways.
New Business:
1. Training for AFPB’s: Information on this upcoming workshop was distributed, Kehoe and Teeter
expressed interest.
2. Ag Land Revaluation: Proto reported that since the revaluation notices have gone out,
representatives have been getting a lot of phone calls from constituents. He wondered what kind of
calls others have been receiving. He finds people have a completely erroneous idea of why this
increase occurred. Kehoe said they sent out about 5000 changes, which also included new
constructions and other increases. This preliminary mailing allows time for Assessment to sit down
with landowners who have questions. Only 612 people have responded in one way or the other.
They are doing presentations: tonight in Ulysses, tomorrow morning in Lansing and on April 4th in
Caroline. Most people have been courteous. She shared some of the worksheets they’ve done for
people to help them understand and evaluate what happened. She’s had many conversations with
Pat Conlon of Lansing, a former farm appraiser, and he thinks Assessment is pretty much on target.
Davidson said people seem to be understanding it, Crispell wondered if people are just becoming
numb to this sort of thing, thinking what can they do about it. Jay Franklin will be talking about how
fire taxes are determined. There was discussion about the Ag Ceiling set by the State and how it’s
been climbing and the need to update the formula. Roth said we need to remind farmers about the
NYS farmers tax credit. Kehoe said they are seeing farmers with residual land that is not part of the
farm operation. There is also a question, following Bob Somer’s presentation at the Ag Summit,
about under which circumstances, if any, woodlands on rented land might be eligible for ag
assessment. Teeter reported she’s been taking calls from people looking for farmers for vacant
land. Diaz is also getting calls from folks looking to reduce their tax liability, and wondering about
conservation easements. Proto said he is taking questions about the STAR exemption and an
upcoming need to reapply, which may happen with the State in 2014.
3. PEEQ vs. Economic Development: The county legislature’s former Planning, Development, and
Environmental Quality committee is now two separate committees: Planning, Environment, &
Environmental Quality and Economic Development. The AFPB currently reports to PEEQ, but is
that the best fit? Diaz asking if are there committee charters; there are and we can look at copies at
the next meeting, and Proto will also look into this further.
Adjourn 1:30 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, April 24th, 7:00 p.m.
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
February 27, 2013
Present:Rachel Crispell, Scott Doyle, Irene Kehoe, Bob Mazourek, Frank Proto,
Monika Roth, Ed Scheffler, Craig Schutt
Excused:David Diaz, Roy Trask
Liaisons: Lin Davidson/Farm Bureau, Pat Pryor/PDEQ
Staff: Debbie Teeter
Call to Order 11:45 p.m.
Additions: none
Approval of Minutes: Doyle corrected the information about the flood maps – conversations are
occurring but not being updated. Moved by Kehoe, second by Crispell, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Teeter:
Last year’s Ag Summit was given a Sign of Sustainability Award by Sustainable Tompkins.
2. Doyle:
American Farmland Trust started a series of webinars for ag professionals, Roth and Teeter
also participated, possibly Diaz as well; focus seems to be on farm transfer. Roth mentioned the
land link concept. She has a Cornell grad student interested in working on this concept and is
looking for funding. Doyle would be happy to help.
Tomorrow he’s going to Albany for an Ag and Markets farmland protection program update;
everyone is hoping for another round of funding.
3. Pryor:
Just came from a meeting in Lansing with DEC representatives regarding a 500 acre parcel in
the northwest of the town for a state forest. This is a preliminary discussion, one issue is that
part of the land is currently leased for farming; there is a way for this to stay available for
agriculture. The land is owned by the NYSDEG parent company. Davidson mentioned a letter of
support from the AFPB board might be helpful at some point.
4. Proto:
Some years ago there was an effort to create the Danby Academy for Ag, Hort, and Env. Teeter
and Roth were also involved. The intent was to work through BOCES, and some programming
did occur. Some funding was secured, and programming evolved into the New Visions
programs through BOCES. A couple weeks ago he met with Ron Accera and some others, and
there may be interest in resurrecting this program on some sort of basis around job training.
He’s been making some contacts about this, to find interest and funds. Roth said there is a
youth garden group in Danby that is searching for a home. Also, see if Workforce development
could get involved. Davidson urged this group to make sure they are aware of existing similar
programs.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
•
•
•
•
•
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Fann/and Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow fanners to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Member Vacancies: Crispell and Baker’s terms have ended; Crispell is willing to serve again, and
the members support this. Two other applications were submitted. Members reviewed and
discussed the merits of each candidate, one of which currently serves as a liaison from Farm
Bureau. Motion by Proto to nominate Crispell and Davidson to fill the vacancies, and offer the 3rd
candidate an associate membership. Second by Mazourek, seven ayes, one abstention. These
applications will be forward to the legislature.
2. Ulysses Ag Plan: Members have reviewed the plan changes. Roth read some e-mails from Town
government and a farmer updating the status of the plan and outlining what is needed from the
AFPB. Proto asked if there had been any objections from Town Board members to any of the edits.
There is no indication of that. Doyle said the specific concerns were removed. Teeter read the
motion the members wrote in support of the Town of Ithaca Ag Plan. Motion to approve the
proposed plan and include the following recommendations and be communicated as appropriate,
2nd Schutt, approved without dissent.
A goal to establish an Agricultural Advisory Committee to oversee plan implementation and
provide input to the Town on matters pertaining to agriculture land in the Town;
Specific Goals, Actions Steps and Timeline for plan implementation;
General areas of the Town where agriculture is active and should be protected;
A thorough review of the Town Zoning Ordinance with recommendations for the
Town to consider when updating it Zoning Laws; and
Many current and potential tools for use in farmland protection are referenced in the plan.
3. Ag Summit: Teeter provided a draft of the agenda, menu and sponsors solicited. Many of the lunch
ingredients will be locally sourced, and RSVP’s are coming in. The Dairy Princess will be there and
serve milk punch.
4. By Laws: Members were provided with the sections of the by laws dealing with term limits (we have
them but can override them), and the attendance policy.
New Business:
1. Day Time Meetings Time: Teeter inquired if members would like to eat and work to stay on
schedule for day time meetings – yes. The meetings move to evening in April; there was discussion
about starting evening meetings at 7:00 rather than 7:30 and all were in agreement.
2. Town of Danby Water District: Ag and Markets has requested comment of the Danby water district
which the board reviewed last year. Motion by Doyle to send to the State the comments previously
provided directly to the Town of Danby, second by Proto. All in favor.
3. Ag Focus Groups: Teeter reviewed the ag sectors and farms identified so far. Members reviewed
list to help identify farms by sector. Roth and she developed a monthly schedule of when to bring
each sector together. Reserving rooms at CCE is proving problematic. The Health Department
meeting rooms up by airport were suggested as an alternative.
4. Farm City Day Host Farm: There was discussion about changing the format to a “trails” event,
which was meet with enthusiasm. Several members (Bob, Irene & colleague, Lin, Ed) volunteered
to help identify potential hosts and start planning.
Adjourn 1:35 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, March 27th, 11:30 a.m.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Tompkins County Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Minutes
January 23, 2013
Present:
Excused:
Liaisons:
Guests:
Rachel Crispell, David Diaz, Irene Kehoe, Frank Proto, Monika Roth,
Ed Scheffler
Scott Doyle, Bob Mazourek, Craig Schutt, Roy Trask
Lin Davidson/Farm Bureau, Pat Pryor/PDEQ
Phil Munson, Jay Franklin
Call to Order 12:00 p.m.
Introductions of board and guests
Presentation by Jay Franklin, County Assessor: Franklin presented information about the review of
Agricultural Properties and resulting data on Ag taxable values. He provided a handout summarizing
data collected. It has been several years since the county has specifically reviewed farmland sales.
Because of cropland demand by both dairy and crop farmers, there has been an increase in farmer-to-
farmer land sale prices. 965 parcels were reviewed for the 2013 assessment roll; they used 2012 aerial
maps as part of the revaluation process as well as sales transaction data. While the assessed value of
land will increase, farmers will still receive an exemption if they apply for ag land assessment by due
April 1.Tax notices will be mailed on March 8; informal reviews can be scheduled between
March 18 and April 5. The Tentative Roll will be posted on May 1.
A key concern of farmers is that taxes are a huge burden and while they receive ag exemptions,
it is not on the full property they own. Also, the State Ag Ceiling values have increased 10% per year for
several years now so the exemption is diminished. There is state legislation to cap the increase in ag
values from year-to-year at 2%. It may be time to use a new formula for determining ag ceiling values.
It is important for farmers with concerns about their assessment to schedule a review meeting.
Approval of Minutes: Moved by Kehoe, second by Proto, approved without dissent.
Announcements:
1. Proto:
a. The Town of Enfield will be contracting with the County to conduct an Aquifer study. The
motivation is coming from concern over fracking and the need for baseline data.
b. The county PDEQ committee is splitting into two committees: Economic Development and
Planning and Environmental Quality. AFPB is scheduled to continue under PDEQ, however, he
is concerned about ensuring that Ag’s economic impact is also recognized and valued. It may
be important to report to Economic Committee annually to give them an ag update.
c. The 1981 Flood maps are being updated.
TOMPKINS COUNTY
AGRICULTURE & FARMLAND PROTECTION BOARD
615 Willow Avenue Ithaca, New York 14850
Telephone (607) 272-2292 Fax (607) 272-7088
The mission of the Tompkins County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board shall be to encourage farming in the County through local
initiatives which create favorable conditions that allow farmers to operate economically viable enterprises.
Old Business:
1. Town of Ulysses Ag Plan: Roth attended a town public meeting on 1/16 – it was well attended by
the Town’s farmers. A key concern was over a statement regarding minimum lot size in ag areas
as being 25 acres. There was the feeling that this would just accelerate farmland loss and that lots
should be kept small so as to conserve larger fields. The deadline for comments on plan is Feb. 1,
then it will go to the full town board for consideration in February. There seemed to be some
suspicion that there were major changes made to the plan since it was approved by the Ag
committee but those that have reviewed it indicate that is not the case.
2. Board Vacancies: There are two farmer vacancies at present: Crispell and Baker. Roth mentioned
that AFPB operating guidelines do not include term limitations though it might be considered.
Crispell indicated an interest in continuing on the board but not as chair. Lin Davidson has also
submitted an application. At this time there were no other applications, but Phil Munson was in
attendance to learn more about the board (Roth will follow up with him); also Dave Buck, a Lansing
farmer, has expressed interest. Roth will check with Baker to see if he intends to stay involved. If
not, the board can review applications at the February meeting, and Crispell’s and the board’s
recommendation for the other vacancy can be submitted to PDEQ in March.
3. Future Agenda Item: Review operating guidelines and discuss attendance policy and term limits.
4. Officers for 2012: Crispell indicated she did not want to continue as chair and she nominated
Scheffler, who accepted the nomination. Motion by Crspell to appoint Scheffler as Chair, second by
Proto, all in favor. Motion by Monika to appoint Crispell as Vice Chair, second by Scheffler, all in
favor. Congrats to our new officers.
5. Ag Summit draft agenda: Roth circulated the draft program. Questions were asked about the
program format…full day with lunch or half day. There was more board interest in a full day but the
logistics are more challenging given limited time. Proposed date is Feb. 27 but we could go a week
later. Topics include estate planning, local laws & ag district law, farmland tax review, and Ag plan
update. Diaz also volunteered to talk about easements. Roth will continue working on this and
hopes to finalize it soon
6. County Ag Plan Grant Work Plan: Roth circulated a draft work plan; the next step is to plan focus
group meetings for industry specific input. She asked about which industry sectors could be
grouped and which should be held as stand-alone. Scheffler expressed interest in an organic
industry group. She also asked if board members wanted to be part of a working group but the
consensus at this time is to have staff provide leadership and the Board provide input at monthly
meetings. Roth will work with County Planning to finalize the draft work plan.
New Business:
1. Town of Lansing Sewer District: The town has received funding from the NYS Economic
Development Corp, Southern Tier district. There is renewed interest in running the sewer up to
Kingdom Farm. It would be good to have the Lansing Ag Committee meet and weigh in on plans;
Roth will contact them.
2. Towns of Enfield and Newfield Comprehensive Plans: Newfield is developing a Comprehensive
Plan and Enfield is updated their Plan. Both towns are reaching out to CCETC for assistance/info.
Roth will keep everyone informed as to relevant progress.
Adjourn 2:00 p.m.
Next Meeting: Wednesday, February 27th, 11:30 a.m.
D.
2013 Agriculture Sector Focus Groups
Meeting Notes
&
November 2013 Farm Meeting Notes
This page intentionally left blank
Tompkins County Ag Plan Update
Focus Groups Summary of Comments
Market Growers
Contributors: Dennis Hartley
What makes your operation successful?
Super-Cider Sundays - education: hand-pressing more intimate
Adaptable marketing, re: RA’s
More customers, multiple visits
Good ag practices
Diversity in population
Challenges?
Customer education: varieties/crops, production methods
Pricing – too high for some people
Rental rates for farmers market stalls
Change in characteristics of customer: used to come to pick for storage, now come to pick for fun
Lack of understanding of what makes good customer service
Jump in ag land values
Future of the industry?
More and more wholesale production going to G.A.P.S. gaps
Any market saturation? Suggestions for new operations:
Do your homework
Find your niche
Equine
Contributors: Al Becker
What makes your operation successful?
Not having a mortgage
Being able to acquire fencing & other building materials inexpensively
Having investors
Being able to have horse in different locations
Uses top-rated studs
Stick to what they know: thoroughbred breeders, not trainers
Mares foal in a space attached to the house with surveillance
Don’t crowd the space they have
Buys grain for specialized dealer, high-protein
They race the foals
Stock is very expensive, can’t afford stud fees, so he breeds for a 3rd party; he’s the breeder, gets
breeder fees
Solid partnership with owners, they respect his opinions
Horses know and trust him
Challenges?
People breed indiscriminately; just because you have a horse doesn’t mean you are a breeder
NY Fees are outrageous; many livestock hauls register in Maine, far cheaper.
Heavy-handed approach to things like the ag census
Taxes
Municipal regulations that exceed state requirements
Future of the industry?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Not sure, but overall in general this society is not (shrinking middle class) going to have the
disposable income to support the industry
Find a way to get around problems, change your idea so it fits town requirements
Large Livestock
Contributors: Reynolds family, Teeter family
What makes your operation successful?
Resilience – ability to prepare for the unexpected
Diversity of marketing opportunities
Challenges?
Can’t find enough pasture and crop land to support operation – to rent or buy
Need more direct market customers
Need for culverts under busy roads for crossing livestock
Ag laws, zoning good but seem to be encroaching, municipalities don’t seem to know about ag and
related laws.
Tax the heck of people who feed us.
More land, better equipment, better access.
Local Feed Exchange: for farmers to post prices they’ve paid and who they’ve bought from; need
mechanism for bulk purchases
Getting into USDA slaughter facilities
Feeds have doubled (hay, grain)
Unexpected catastrophes (bison let out, disease outbreak, etc.)
Understanding the global markets involved in growing crops and animals here.
Ag often left out of emergency planning
Water – where it is, how to use it, difficult to do big picture planning when programs approach is
piece-meal. Also problem with diverted water from development. Need to haul water some times of
the year.
Hard to find farm land to buy – there may be willing sellers, but they are complacent holding on to it.
Neighbor relations, complaints
Bullying from municipalities, etc when they are leaving u alone, u don’t want to speak up about a
problem and make waves.
PDR: a current downside is that the ag value has increased significantly in the county, closing the
gap to the development value. Consolidation of ag land is occurring and planned to occur.
Future of the industry?
Opportunities for job training and creation
Need for municipal ag advisory committees
Small Livestock
Contributors: Lisa Ferguson, Erica Frenay, John Wertis
What makes your operation successful?
Have explored everything, if were younger would market in NYC
Also selling hay
Loose-knit cooperation btwn producers
Being retired has provided the opportunity to peddle to restaurants/provide chefs with samples;
restaurants are ever-changing market, partly due to competition
Have to be creative
Keeps land attractive to renters by keeping good quality seed on the ground
Not where want to be yet
Rotationally grazing at much higher rate
Angoras were a good choice: very docile, easy to contain, but cashmeres jumpy, also more prone
to twins and triplets, so herd grows (too) quickly.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Lots of support from local community; interest in buying our products; great access to mentors and
ag support network
Incredible demand for local foods, and many different venues providing connections between
consumers and farmers
Diversification (sell hay in addition to raise goats)
Loose-knit cooperation btwn producers
Has time to peddle to restaurants
Keeps good seed on fields he rents for hay to keep them attractive to renters
Challenges?
Deer, deer, deer; specifically the parasites they have in common with small ruminants, DEC doesn’t
recognize PIO US Worm (parasite) as justification for a nuisance permit
Need vets knowledgeable about small ruminants
Possible/pending legislation limiting access to farmer-administered animal antibiotics
Feed supply – infrastructure is contracting – goes to Dryden for Blueseal feed (can get corn and
soybeans nearby)
Paying $4 a bale for hay [might be low?]
When you’re small, who can afford hay-making equipment?
Do some towns have restrictive laws:
Animal Rights activists, causing problems over guard dogs; there are some restrictive housing regs
Limited market for meat goats, better for sheep
Lack of slaughter facilities
Climate: droughts have a big influence on production
Registered farm as an LLC, started getting stuff from people offering to help advertise new status,
apparently there is a law requiring this, but there is no consequences for not doing this.
Too many animals right now, some for sale, not too hard to find buyers – fiber goats
Cashmere goats produce far less fiber than the Angoras, time to re-think their place in the herd.
Disconnect btwn bank and current farm land values: appraised at $1000 and assessed at $3200
Needs a shop and a sign – people want a connection to a farm, goats are right-sized for farm visits,
but town regs make a bldg. and sign hard
Keeping up with pasture rotation during a drought
Considered cottages for visitors, but really moving away from that
Needs time, resources to do what they’d like
Really nice signs are stolen
Service trucks park way off the road, right in the pasture
Had to go to auction to buy hay last year, couldn’t find elsewhere; the old guys have strong
networks to get what they need – how do you find/build a network?
Lower overhead costs, less predation pressure
More processing infrastructure, more options for local and/or organic grain feed rations
Access to processing facilities, high feed prices (esp. organic)
Higher fuel prices will make travel to processors even more expensive, higher electricity prices will
make freezer storage more expensive, climate change makes planning for forage and feed more
challenging
Limited market for meat goats; better for sheep
Deer have parasites that are dangerous to small ruminants
Need vets knowledgeable of small ruminants
May soon be legislation limiting access to animal antibiotics
Feed supply infrastructure is contracting – have to travel to get what is needed
If you’re small scale, tough to afford hay-making equipment
Fed govt – tracking, bio-security, chips in ear tags
Overly restrictive municipal laws
Animal rights activists
Future of the industry?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Feds tracking livestock, bio-security, chips in ear tags
Need some sort of recognition for farmers – like sign program recognizing farms so people
recognize farms and the stewardship farmers provide
Farmers need to understand they are competitors – how much room is there for more porducers?
Trying to decide – in full time, or out and part time
Trend toward direct marketing
Hear from a lot of folks who plan to have a goat farm
There is good, professional help available in this county
Value-added is required - can’t make on just flees and pelts, working with NYC designer/weaver
Adopt local food laws to support small farmers (like what’s been spreading among Maine towns:
http://www.beginningfarmers.org/another-town-passes-ordinance-against-state-and-federal-
inspection-of-local-food-in-maine/) - a bit radical, but if Maine can do it, why not Ithaca?
Field Crops
Contributors: Lin Davidson, Alan Teeter
What makes your operations/industry successful?
Enjoyment, nice to be able to be educated to figure out how to grow the crops
Grain industry: can be successful because there are family or multifamily corporations with
institutional memory – know what to do/not do
Growing up on the farm, learn it from parents/ grandparents; then inheriting land, equipment, etc. so
there’s low overhead - allows for part-time operations/would be hard to do full time
Rule for farmers used to be “marry a school teacher”
Diversity of crops that can be grown and places/ways to sell them
Flexibility/Ingenuity: Growing crops is not a year-around job; successful crop farmers figure out how
to fill in the gaps; i.e. Jason Turek markets produce year around
Cooperation with larger nearby farm.
What are the challenges for your operation/industry, now and in the future?
Finding reliable, temporary help.
Being flexible
Finding a market for your products
For the small guys: price of fuel, taxes, equipment maintenance
Land access, across the board
No longer have income-averaging to provide a cushion for lean years
Potential move to raise capital gains taxes
Getting parts for equipment/equipment fixed: takes half a day to a day and half or more to get
something needed
Keeping up with everybody else
Getting into the “network”
Poorly timed Farmers Markets; should be 4-7 in the evening for folks after work
Impact of Climate Issues?
Potential for double cropping – follow wheat with soybeans
Plant longer-season hybrids, which more likely to have higher production
Potential for heavy downpours/deluges
What do you see 50 Years down the Road?
Monster farms and small niche operations and part-timers
Rental land Issues – rates? Availability? Secure (leases? Rates? People get ag assessment? Impact
on operation if rented land went away?
Increasing competition, especially after you’ve made inputs
Lots getting sold out from under them for use by bigger operations
New non-farm owners have unrealistic expectations of rents
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rents reaching as high as $75/acre, although have heard as high as $150 in Cayuga Co.; also, now
seeing “shares” in the crop produced, i.e. a 60/40 split
Some leases are being written for 10 years w/option to buy
Farmers from over the county line coming in – need a better handle on this
What is the future of the land if you stop farming? What motivates you? Is this something that could
expand in this county? Why or why not?
Land’s worth twice what it was last year
Not sure, it’s likely to go to someone else to farm it
Hope children will take over
Relationships with those on and around the land are part of what holds you to the land, if there is a
disconnect, there can be a loss of the next generation
Help us understand field crops marketing: Where do your crops go? How do you make your
connections? Who buys your products?
Prices are up now, especially on corn
A lot of old family/old farmer connections
Some farmers work six counties: integrated operations, i.e. trucking, grain, equipment, etc.
The Board (Chicago) that the prices come off of; have been around for 100 years, difference now is
the international market, but Chicago is still setting the price
New operations setting up in the Ukraine, where land is under-utilized
International lack of infrastructure, no-frills equipment
Pacma (Perdue ag marketing association), Lakeview, Oswego, also Lansing Grain (in Michigan)
Product is sold nationally and internationally, through rail cars to eastern sea ports
Forest Owners
Contributors: Tom Seeley, Tim Levatich, Lew Ward
What are the successes/opportunities for forest owners?
Forest owner education groups and support are important - I count on the New York Forest Owners
Association, CCE, and NYSDEC.
What are the problems/treats facing forest owners?
Paying the taxes on their forest land.
Property taxes are eating us alive. Value growth of top quality, fully stocked, hardwood timber,
managed well, cannot even pay the taxes on the tree farm acreage.
Insects and disease vectors driven by climate change.
The “Emerald Necklace Syndrome”; some people think my forest management decisions should be
influenced by the public.
Human-transported diseases and pests will continue to present a major catastrophic threat to our
regional forests.
The loss of forest land, particularly well managed and sustainable forests.
What do you see for the future of local/regional forests, both positive and negative?
Natural gas development will seriously degrade our regional forests.
Property taxes will continue to promote subdivision of real estate, taking more forest land out of
active management.
Variable climate will continue to stress our trees, reducing overall quality and yield of forest
products.
How can the County, by itself and/or in partnership with existing agencies and organizations
(Cooperative Extension, DEC, SWCD, etc.) do to support and assist forest owners?
Provide tax relief: forest land that is under a conservation easement should be taxed at its actual
market value, not the value that it would have if it could still be developed
Keep up the good work with forest management education. New programs aimed at the public and
children will support forest landowners in making better choices for their forests over the long term.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Make sure the concept of land preservation is not the ONLY option being praised as ideal land
management (this is another aspect of the Emerald Necklace Syndrome).
What else would you like to tell us?
I'm very impressed with the quality of CCE personnel and programs. You all deserve a big Thank
You! Keep your dedication strong - you are doing good work.
**More info to come after Forest Owners 10/1 meeting
•
•
BIG Ideas for Ag Plan Update – Nov. 20 Ag Meeting
Future of Farming
Land for Farming
Conserve Land
Viable Farms
o What Should Be Preserved or Not
What is Appropriate Development
Conservation of Resources
o Environmental Protection
Handle Land Taxes
Grant Outreach Info
Ag Ed
Non-Farm Education & Schools
Disclosure Notice
Town Education
Farming Is Good Healthy Land Use
Cost of Community Services
o Education on Real Cost
Farm Estate Planning
Age Lower – Hort, Animals…
Non-Family Succession
o Timing
o PDR
Transfer Issues
Why Punished for Not Selling
o Assessment
Opt In Spec Ag Info Distribution
Money
Young Engagement
o Land
o Funds
o Older/Younger TTC
o Internships
Policy
Allowed Farm Enterprises on Adjacent Lands
Support & Protect
o PDR
o Guidance
Buffer Zones
o Timber increase Awareness
o Wood Lands
Property Rights
Marketing
Co-Op Marketing/Processing/Storage
o Pride of NY
Farms of Distinction (like Dairy of Distinction)
o Agri-Tourism Important
Experimental Tourism
Slaughter Facilities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
➔
Individual Ideas from farmers present at Nov. 20 Ag Meeting
Policy
Reduce tax burden
More education of Town & Planning Board.
o Advise townships on ag districts, and there purpose.
o Advise on Right to Farm Laws.
Encourage development rights Purchases
Establish Agriculture Advisory Board at town level- city level mtg tax
Disclosure Notices- Require purchasers in Ag District to view a video that addresses issues that
arise living next to a farm- smells, loose livestock, manure spreading, farm operations at
night/early morning during planting and harvesting.
Tax policies that discourage conversion of Farmland.
Communities should be compensated for loss of farmland – real cost.
Tax policy that focuses on local ownership.
Support and develop succession planning for non-family successors
Ag Zoning: Let small business thrive.
Site planning that considers ag use
Land Link
Property Rights- buffer zones around Ag
Identify potential Ag Land
County level action
Ag Awareness and Education
Educate public about farm equipment on roads, i.e SMV’s are not driveway markers
Ag in the Schools
Young Farmers Club.
Education of non-farm community
Continue schoolchildren
Educate population on the rules and reg farms are required to adhere to. Keep up on rules and
regulations.
Local Food
Local Food Trail
Bike to Farms
Sunday Open House.
Farmer’s Market
Ag Economic Development/Marketing
Dryden Farmers Market
Cooperative Marketing for smaller farms, i.e. Lamb Marketing; pool a large number of animals
for big sale to large markets, for example New York City.
Support for shared process/storage centers.
Promote small slaughterhouses (USDA or otherwise). Meat pre-hung for customers. Processing
of animals for consumers
Dissemination of farming grants and programs available for farmers
Encourage good drive-by farm appearance
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
E.
2014 Ag Summit
Notes
This page intentionally left blank
2014 Tompkins County Ag Summit
Ag Plan Update Strategy Discussion Notes
Agriculture Economic Development
new products in demand – what are they and how to get started
business development/expansion/diversification – what are the opportunities
ways to stay afloat when costs keep going up
infrastructure needs on farms
funding for ag projects including infrastructure -- construction
marketing—finding markets, exploring opportunities – fostering connections
support service needs: slaughter facilities; commercial kitchen; biofuel processing; equipment
parts; tack shops; hay suppliers, etc.
collective purchasing/marketing as a way to save money/increase returns
risk management – pests, parasites, weather/climate change
farm generated energy: biomass, methane, wind, solar, etc.
Solar development (group 1)
Ideas for addressing the above needs?
Group 1
Dairy, organic dairy- Byrne building a new plant in Cortland
Diverse (Groton Food Hub) marketing outlets from Community to direct
Cold storage
Value- added processing- yogurt, hard cider, wine, distilling, malting, beer
BuyLocal –completing the local diet
Energy – solar development and other NYSERDA
Coop buying to cut costs- seeds, solar (Solar Tompkins_, plastics, etc…
Group 2
Hay market for export
Agritourism- we are a destination – farmstand/u-picks
Silropasture – forest development
Buy Local 7 CSA’s
Forestry industry- underdeveloped
Diversification and small scale
Maple industry development – profit?
Alternative Energy development-wind, biomass (---- , pellets), solar
Value added – hops & malting
Green Building – straw bale, timber, old barn
Works against us
o Code enforcement & policy/laws zoning
o Work force training needed
Local Foods - rank the issues above as to importance: H= high; M=medium; L=low
products in demand M, L, H, H, M, H, M
quality production for successful marketing H, H, H, M, L, H
GAPS – food safety requirements H, H, M, M, H, H, H
marketing—multiple strategies, finding markets, exploring opportunities – fostering connections
H,H, H, H, H, H, M, H, M, 1
lots of local food producers – competition H, M, M, L, M, L, M
viability of small food producers H, M, H, H, H, M
consumer data – targeted marketing M, M, M, M, M, H, H, 2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
local food prices – can customer afford local foods yes, household priorities H, M, M, H, H, M, H, H
value added products and services M, M, L, H, H, H, M
agritourism H, M, M, H, L, M
What topics are missing?
Offering of Local Foods at local supermarkets – prominent placement. Wegman’s does some of this
I think. Tops not so much.
Markets/Local Co-ops/grocery stores need more
Consumer education (why local is better)
Consumer education; increase the customer base
Education to kids; targeting the young generation,
consumer education,
convenience foods vs. health cost
Consumer education: local is better!
Direct education
Taxes must come down!!!
Ideas for addressing the above needs?
More networking opportunities for farmers and producers with retail business
Agri-tainment
sense of community
education of young people
Farm tour weekend
farmers making connections with consumers
education- seasonal cooking
kid specials – education target kids
Rural community lost – food- community could build on each other
Middle class prioritized spending away from food, but could afford
Eat local for health vs. taste
Tompkins is relatively educated
Farm tours- weekends
Food as a sense of community
Consumer education – CSA you will live longer
Marketing –delivering of crops to the consumer
Land Use Policy & Regulations
changing federal/state regs – food safety, labor, trucking, etc.
local regs: zoning requirements
development impacts: roads, drainage, culvert maintenance
value of farm land – assessment practices; taxes are a challenge
land access for farming; rental rates
Environment Rank the issues above as to importance: H= high; M=medium; L=low
sustainable farming practices to protect the environment,Nutrient guide H, 4, H, H, H, H, H, H, M,
H, H, H, H, H
climate change (risk management),react or effect,diversity L, 1, M, M, H, H, M, H, L, L, M, L, M-L,
M, M
protecting water quality,storm water regulation H,2, H, H, H, H, H, M, H, H, H, M, H, H, H
wildlife issues,deer on forest land/raise quotas/ length of season L, 3, M, M, M, M, L, M, L, M, H,
M, M, H, H
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
development impacts,storm water regs, pesticides for lawns H, 5, M, M, H, M, M, M, H, M, M, H, M,
M, M
energy from farms,windmills, more grants for farmers (2 people) M,6, MM, L, M, H, H, L,L, M, M,
M, M, M
What topics are missing?
Invasive species (7 people)
Wetlands (4 People)
Air quality (4 people)
Household chemical use
Resilience
Regeneration practices
Industry pollution
Household, urban chemicals use and pollution (3people)
Ideas for addressing the above needs?
Ithaca fork
Soil building
Decentralization of food production
Reduce deer herd (allow harvesting in suburban area) No fee for landowners, longer season
Soil arrays
Energy for farms
More - larger grants for wind-solar-etc
Education re: bio fuels
Education of local residents re: water quality
Sustainable- not just organic: cover crops, no-till, composting
Risk management = diversity of crops
Wildlife – increase quotas, longer season, fee-free hunting for landowners
Emphasize energy alternatives
Water quality – continue on-farm programs to clean up cow barn yards
Urban education; lawn spraying, salt spreading , household chemical pollution
Ag Awareness/Ag Education Rank the issues above as to importance: H= high; M=medium; L=low
neighbor relations H, H, H, M, M, M local, H let me know when you are fertilizing
farm safety issues: trespass, slow moving vehicles, animals, transmitting pests, etc. L, M, H, H, M-
local,
educating public about farms and farming practices M, M-fb, L, H, H
youth education M, H-school, H, Public, H- Public relations, H, outdated resources
farmer recognition L, M-FB, M, L, M, M
how we communicate about agriculture – dealing with negative perceptions M, M, L, M, M
media stories L, M, L, NOT Neg , M-H, M
agritourism H, M County, school, M, M, M
Many overlaps all are high-priority
What topics are missing?
Farming with disabilities
Wildlife management (deer, rabbits)
Aged
Access ti workable land
4-H should be in every school!
Ideas for addressing the above needs?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-
Intergrated curriculum –ag ed
Connect with / TC3
What resources already exist the could be implemented
What are target audiences
Food growing programs – summer oversight- resilience
Dawn – No Ag Ed/FFA programs other then
LeGrace- Kid’s get extended cheese and don’t recognize “cow” “cheese”
Farm to Table/consumer education
Teacher training opportunities
Future Farmers/Workforce Rank the issues above as to importance: H= high; M=medium; L=low
farm transfer to family or non-family members (estate planning) H, H
beginning farmers H, M
farming mentors to help beginning farmers M, L
finding reliable help L, H
training programs L, H
immigration reform bill L
labor law restrictions and crackdowns M, M
What topics are missing?
Financing
Marketing products and lifestyle
Laddor movement
Financing
Marketing FB
Focus Group: Future Farmers/Workforce -Rank in importance: H=high, M=medium, L=low
H farm transfer to family or non-family members (estate planning)
H/M beginning farmers
H framing mentors to help beginning farmers
H/M finding reliable help
H/M training programs
*M/L immigration reform bill
*M/L labor law restrictions and crackdowns
*level of importance was split between the large farm and the small farm
What topics are missing:
Financing
Agri-tourism
Technology & Social Media (webpages/facebook, etc)
Bookkeeping
Follow up from youth farm programs
Marketing (“how to” for products & future/young farmers)
Leap from employee to manager
Educate older farmers in regards to financing or supporting young farmers
farming for people with disabilities
farming for veterans/veterans with disabilities
how/where to start kids with farming interests and move them through to a TC3 or Cornell program
Ideas for addressing the above needs
getting help (financial & emotional) from family for new farmers
use of websites to help farmers
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
youth farm program
TC3 new program
Agricultural Justice Program
Farmers Veterans Coalition
reaching out to older farmers to mentor/assist young farmers
mentorship programs
•
•
•
•
•
•
This page intentionally left blank
F.
May 2015 Farmer & Agricultural Land
Owner Meetings Notes
This page intentionally left blank
May 2015 Farmer and Agricultural Land Owners Meetings
Each meeting began with an introduction to the plan and overview of the process. Attendees
were provided with Post-it notes and asked to list their issues and concerns, one per Post-It. They were
then asked to place their notes on sheets of paper, each listing one of the draft plan’s major goal
themes. One this was finished, we moved these notes onto newsprint of each major themes that
included strategies and action steps, noting those issues generated by the group which were already
including in the strategies and action steps. Each person was then provided with 18 “sticky dots” and
asked to user them to identify what they considered to be the most important action steps.
The following are the comments provided at both meetings:
Agricultural Economic Development
Facilitate on-Farm/Farm Support Infrastructure
Lack of capital for infrastructure and repairs
Develop a Comprehensive Marketing Strategy
Advertising class classes? How to effectively
Lack of promotion of product
Ag Economic Development –
o monitor enhancement
o volume added
Develop a Regional Website
Need butchers – (USDA or not)
Local Foods
Organic food more expensive
Easier access or more times to get food lockers
Small flocks
Address seasonality
o Hoop houses
o Preservation to develop year supply
Developing Direct-to-Consumer Markets
Community Kitchen
Modernizing Ag & Markets Processing Regs for small to mid-sized livestock producers
Organic/conventional compatability, ie: GMO, spray drift
Land Use Policy and Regulations
Preserve and promote farmland
Land use laws that restricts sale of farmland zoning
Taxation assessment
Animal numbers cow is not comparable to a 90lb sheep (in Ulysses)
Taxes
Housing encroachment
Finding a way to reduce cost for large land holder
Regulation State/Federal
Increasing amount of regulations
Government Regulations Local level, noise ordanance “Comprehensive Plans, Z word
Government regulation state level
DEC DOT
Tompkins NY Taxation and labor cost. When your competition is global
Even income over good and bad years
We do not need any more contracts on our farms
Regulation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Farm size/ completion for land/resources
Large industrial farms are forcing the price of farmland too high
Land taxes
Overall taxes are too high, it is ridiculous that woodland is assessed at 2500 per land
High tax price of Ag land in Ulysses
Federal programs favor big farms
Big farming favored
Policy and regulations consistence of large-small organic-other
Land availability
Land Grab Techniques
Protection for future farmlands
Understanding cons easements
Comp. plans and impacts down Towns’ Ag
Agricultural Awareness
Population expansion around Ithaca
County-wide tours of elected/appointed officials
Misconception by non-agriculture public
Non-farmer resident compliant about necessary farm operations
Traffic/development
Education and outreach
Industry public perception that conventional food is unsafe and mistreats their livestock
Environmental Quality
Manure spreading pollution?
Industry funds
Seed for cover crops
Misunderstanding of farm practices that may or not be environmentally damaging
Science educator GMO what it means
Ag awareness
More info about NYSERDA programs
Poor condition of a number of county highways
For Ag Energy and cost source
Energy- looking at renewables
Future Farmers/Workforce
Grants for small farmers fencing etc.
Labor
Seasonal help
Labor availability
Lack of mechanical knowledge or nearby repair facilities
Encourage young farmers (fix regulations)
Cost of land and inaccessibility to beginning farmers
Work on immigration policy
Rising minimum wage
Rural internet
Farmer age
Train more certified butchers
State and Federal Labor Laws
Making land available to new farmers
New owners for Finger Lakes Woolen Mill?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
G.
Agriculture & Farmland Protection Board
Purchase of Development Rights Criteria
This page intentionally left blank
Criteria to Identify Strategic Farmland for Protection
From Tompkins County PDR Feasibility Study, Frantz, et.al. - Nov. 2001
1. Soil Quality: target only the better quality soils for protection.
2. Farm Size and percent used for crop or livestock production: target larger parcels with a higher
percentage of land available for production.
3. Proximity to other viable farm operations and farmland: protect larger tracts of contiguous active
farmland and blocks of farms.
4. Conformance with local municipal land-use plans: land chosen for protection should be located
outside areas selected by local government for development through zoning or infrastructure
investments.
5. Density of rural sprawl: area for protection should have a demonstrated loss of farmland due to
creation of frontage lots and nonfarm residential development to reduce the further loss of
valuable farmland.
6. Land is within an ag district or outside the district but receiving ag assessment: indicates a
commitment on the part of the owners to ag.
7. Proximity to environmentally sensitive areas: protect natural resources and open space.
8. Stewardship of the land: participation in federal conservation programs and best management
practices.
State PDR Program Criteria
Highest Priority Given to the following:
1. will preserve viable ag land (land highly suitable for ag production which will continue to be
economically feasible for such use if property taxes, farm use restrictions, and speculative
activities are limited to levels approximating those in commercial ag areas not influenced by non
farm development)
2. located in areas facing significant development pressures
3. serve as a buffer for a significant natural public resource containing important ecosystem or
habitat characteristics
Consideration is also given to:
1. number of acres to be protected
2. quality of the soil resources involved
3. percentage of total farm acreage available for production
4. the extent to which the proposed property is bordered by or proximate to other farms already
protected by conservation easement or which might be expected to enter into a farmland
preservation agreement in the future
5. the level of farm management demonstrated by current owner
6. the likelihood of property succession as a farm if present ownership changes
7. the cost of the proposal in terms of achieving the best value for the funds requested
8. the reasonableness and feasibility of the proposal
Federal Farmland Protection program
land must contain at least 50% prime, unique, state or locally important soil or listed historic or
archaelogical sites
land must be subject to a pending offer from an eligible entity for the purpose of limiting conversion
to non-ag uses
eligible land includes cropland, rangeland, grassland, pasture land and forest land that is part of an
ag operation
demonstrate a commitment to long term conservation of ag land
capability to acquire, manage and enforce easement
staff capacity to monitor easement
availability of funds for 50% of the appraised market value of the easement or funds at least 25% of
the value if the landowner donates up to 25%
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
This page intentionally left blank
H.
ClimAid Report Information
This page intentionally left blank
T he New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSER0A) has been
studying, documenting, and modeling the impacts of climate change in New York State
for several years . As public awareness of the impacts of climate c hange has grown, so have
NYSER0A's efforts to better understand and forecast both gradual changes and extreme events.
In 2011, NYSERDA released Responding to Climate Change in New York State (ClimAI0), which
provides climate projections for the state, as well as detailed information on New York's adapta-
tion strategies and vulnerability to climate change . Working with the original ClimAI0 researchers
and using the most up-to-date datasets, improved baseline scenarios, and the latest generation
of climate models and emissions projections, NYSERDA has released Climate Change in New
York State : Updating the 2011 ClimAID Climate Risk Information (the 2014 Update).
Climate Change Is Happening in New York State
Across the Empire State, temperatures are increasing; along the coastline, the sea level is rising .
These changes are projected to accelerate because of increased concentrations of carbon
dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere . Throughout the Northeast,
heavy rain events have become more frequent, and cold events have become more rare . These
and other climate changes are projected to lead to increasing impacts across New York State's
economy and natural systems . Not all of these changes will necessarily be gradual; when certain
tipping points are crossed, impacts can increase dramatically. Impacts from climate change are
already affecting every part of New York State-water, energy, agriculture, ecosystems, and other
social and economic systems-and all its 20 million inhabitants .
Projections for New York State
Updated climate models and methods have helped scientists refine their previous projec-
tions for higher average temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and sea level rise
in New York State. Scientists also project an increase in the frequency of extreme events,
such as heat waves, heavy downpours, and coastal flooding.
The 2014 Update highlights trends and projections for each of the seven regions in New
York State for several climate variables: temperature, precipitation, extreme events, and sea
level rise. Generally consistent with the 2011 ClimAID projections, these new projections
represent a refinement based on updated science .
~ Comparison of 2011 and 2014
\'.ti Temperature Projections
14 ~~---=-----=-----=-----=-----=..."=--=--=--=--=--=--::::::.=====:::r...,--~
■ Projections from 2014 Update
[L 1 2 ■ Projections from 2011
~
(j)
Q) ~ 101---+---+------~
0)
Q)
0
C:
Q)
0)
C: co ..c::
0
Q) ......
::J
0
(j)
..0
<{
2020 2050 2080 2100
0 Comparison of 2011 and 2014
Precipitation Projections
25 ~~---------~~----_-_-_-_c,_~_-_-_-_-_-_._,~--~
■ Projections from 2014 Update
l 20 ■ Projections from 2011
Q)
0)
C:
~ 15 >-----+------~---+---+-------<
0
C:
0
~ 10 t-----...... ·a.
·c3
~
0... 5
2020 2050 2080 2100
Statewide values are computed as the lowest and highest value from the lower and upper bounds,
respectively, of the middle-range of projections from across all seven regions . The middle-range of
projections in 2014 are bounded at top and bottom by the 25th and 75th percentiles of data from
all modeled projections. 2014 temperature ranges are rounded to the nearest half-degree and 2014
precipitation change percentages rounded to the nearest 1 %. The middle-range of the 2011 data is
computed as the middle 67% of values from model-based probabilities. 2011 temperature ranges are
rounded to the nearest half-degree and 2011 precipitation change percentages to the nearest 5%.
Sea Level Rise
Researchers developed projections of sea level rise in the 2014 Update using a new meth-
od that combines climate model outputs with researchers' expertise and other literature,
including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report. This
method allows for analysis of variables that climate models cannot simulate at this time,
such as changes in ice sheet dynamics.
Since 1900, sea level rise has averaged 1 .2 inches per decade in the region. Much of that
rise has been due to ocean water warming and expanding (known as thermal expansion).
Recently, melting of land ice has become a comparable contributor to sea level rise . Be-
cause melting of land ice is expected to continue to accelerate, and the rate of acceleration
is uncertain, the high-end sea level rise projections of 6 feet by 2100 cannot be ruled out.
e Middle-Range Projected Sea Level Rise in New York City and Coastal
Long Island
Incremental rise above 2000-2004 average baseline level
What Has Changed Since the 2011 ClimAID Report Was Released?
The 2014 Update uses the Coupled Model lntercomparison Project, Phase 5 (CMIP5) climate models,
featured in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). Many of
these higher resolution models include new features, such as how vegetation may respond to tempera-
ture and precipitation change, as well as overall improvements in the climate simulations themselves.
Additionally, 35 climate model projections are used, rather than the 16 used in the 2011 ClimAID Report.
Much like the climate models, emissions scenarios have also evolved. The 2014 Update uses Repre
sentative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) from the AR5. The RCPs correspond to possible paths of
greenhouse gas levels into the future. Previous emissions scenarios relied on specific assumptions
about potential policies and economic situations in the future (e.g., high economic growth, growing use
of low-carbon fuels) to create GHG estimates. In contrast, the RCPs do not depend on these assump
tions and are therefore more flexible in terms of how both society and GHG levels might change over
time. The 2014 Update uses two RCPs (known as RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5), which are defined respectively
as the low/mid and high ranges of expected GHG levels in the coming century.
The combination of the updated models, the use of the RCPs, and slight changes in methods yielded
some changes in the results from the original ClimAID work. However, the changes are small compared
to the inherent uncertainties in any long-term projections. The 2014 Update can be considered a refine-
ment of the previous projections, and it amplifies many of the messages of the 2011 ClimAID report.
Additional Information
Visit nyserda.ny.gov/ClimAID for more information and the full suite of updated projections:
► Horton, R., 0. Bader, C . Rosenzweig, A. OeGaetano, and W .Solecki. 2014. Climate Change in New York
State: Updating the 2011 ClimAID Climate Risk Information. New York State Energy Research and Develop-
ment Authority (NYSEROA), Albany, New York.
► Rosenzwe ig, C., W. Solecki, A. DeGaetano, M. O'Grady, S. Hassol, P. Grabhorn (Eds.). 2011. Responding
to Climate Change in New York State : The ClimA/O Integrated Assessment for Effective Climate Change
Adaptation. Technical Report. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSEROA),
Albany, New York.
► Rosenzwe ig, C., W. Solecki, A. DeGaetano, M. O'Grady, S. Hassol, P. Grabhorn (Eds.). 2011. Responding
to Climate Change in New York State: The ClimA/O Integrated Assessment for Effective Climate Change
Adaptation . Synthesis Report. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSEROA),
Albany, New York.
() RD-CERMD-climaid-br-1-v1 9/14