Is there support for grassland agriculture in Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri?

How do states support grassland agriculture? The Grassland 2.0 policy team is excited to announce the release of state policy profiles for Minnesota, Illinois, and Missouri! These policy profiles roundup the trends and policy tools affecting grasslands and managed grazing. Profiles are authored by University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers Kailey Felch, Ana Fochesatto, Erin Green, Yu Lu, and Adena Rissman.

For those seeking grass-based milk and meat, viable grazing farms, clean water, and carbon storage, are your state’s policies supporting you? These state profiles reveal how each state’s financial support for grasslands compares with support for croplands. They also include actionable policy for supporting grassland agriculture.

These profiles complement the Wisconsin profile from 2021.

Why would states support grassland ag?

Grasslands are vital for environmental sustainability, providing essential benefits such as soil health, water quality, pollinator habitat, and carbon sequestration. Despite their importance, working grasslands have been significantly undervalued and underfunded compared to other types of agriculture.

“Managed grazing and grasslands benefit people and the planet,” says Pete Huff, co-Director of the Wallace Center at Winrock International, “making state policy choices critical for our future. These briefs support evidence-based policy and help inform a unified Midwestern voice on grazing and grasslands policy in the U.S.”

The new state policy profiles highlight the unique challenges and opportunities in each state, providing needed data points and a roadmap for decision makers and community members who want to support grassland ecosystems.

Highlights

Decline in Grasslands: All three states have lost grassland  during the past two decades.

Changes in non-woodland pasture areas by state:

Minnesota: 40% decrease, from 2.07 million acres to 1.24 million

Illinois: 38% decrease, from 1,500,865 acres to 923,869 acres

Missouri: 19% decrease, from 9.3 million acres to 7.5 million acres

Figure 1. Natural Resources Conservation Service incentives for prescribed grazing (2005-2020). This figure shows the land unit acres in Minnesota under NRCS prescribed grazing by fiscal year. (see other states’ statistics in their profiles)

Federal and State Support: The researchers found a marked disparity in financial support for grasslands compared to row crops. Often more than one hundred million dollars are spent annually in each state for commodity crops, whereas insurance payments for pasture and forage are minimal.

Average annual payments for pasture/forageAverage annual payments for cornAverage annual payments for soybeans
Minnesota $2.4 million$213 million$132 million
Illinois$442,000$206 million$118 million
Missouri$2.1 million$121 million$98 million
Average annual spending per state (between 2005 and 2020)

Conservation Programs: The profiles recommend potential pathways for expanding federal and state conservation programs to better support managed grazing. This includes programs like the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), and developing new initiatives such as a USDA-certified Perennial Crop Advisor Program.

Figure 2: Illinois Land Unit Acres Receiving Grazing Land Conservation Practices by Program – This figure depicts the acreage receiving assistance for grazing land conservation practices by the NRCS programs in Illinois (2005-2020). The programs are the Agricultural Water Enhancement Program (AWEP), Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA), Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), Grassland Reserve Program (GRP), Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), and Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program (WHIP). (see other states’ statistics in their profiles)

Recommendations

If decision-makers want to reap the benefits of grassland ag, they can:

  • Expand USDA Programs: Focus on practices that improve soil health and water quality, including managed grazing and agroforestry.
  • Support Beginning and Underserved Farmers: Provide financial incentives and technical assistance to encourage adoption of sustainable practices.
  • Develop Grassland Supply Chains: Support infrastructure for processing and marketing grass-based products.
  • Enhance Local Technical Assistance: Increase funding for conservation districts and extension services to write grazing plans and support farmers getting started with managed grazing.

Interested in supporting grassland agriculture in your state?

Explore our comprehensive state policy profiles for Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri, and Wisconsin to find actionable recommendations. Download the briefs and share them with local policymakers, agricultural organizations, and conservation groups.

About the Authors

  • Kailey Felch: Research Assistant at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and recent graduate from Conservation Biology and Environmental Studies 
  • Ana Fochesatto: PhD Candidate at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, focusing on just transitions in agriculture 
  • Erin Green: Former Research Assistant at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and Restoration Ecologist at Integrated Restorations  
  • Yu Lu: PhD Candidate at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, focusing on agricultural and environmental policy
  • Adena Rissman: Vilas Distinguished Achievement Professor at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences

For more information, contact Adena Rissman at adena.rissman@wisc.edu.