Dodie Stillman

Google Translate for insects? How BYU students are helping humans understand animal communication
By Tyler Stahle,
July 19, 2023

For years, scientists have buzzed about the bee waggle – the groovy dance honeybees do by shaking their abdomen upon returning to the hive. This waggle tells other bees where to fly to find delicious nectar. Now, a team of BYU computer science students is abuzz to decode the secret language of the hive. Armed with a hum-dinger of a research project and cutting-edge technology, these students are translating the bee waggle in real-time.

“Bees will do this dance on a vertical surface and they’ll kind of waggle or shake in a line, and the angle of that line has to do with the angle of the sun that the bees need to fly from the hive to go to the food source,” said BYU computer science professor and project advisor Sean Warnick. “There’s a surprising amount of sophistication going on between these creatures that we just think of as insects.”

The project team, comprised of students across disciplines such as computer science and business, is creating a computer program that tracks bee waggles and interprets them in real-time on a computer screen. To capture the waggle dances, students constructed an observation hive with plexiglass siding in the BYU greenhouse. A camera records the waggle dances, and algorithms created by the students measure, annotate, and interpret the movements.

While the project may sound un-bee-lievable, the students themselves say that they’re learning more about bees than they ever anticipated. Nonetheless, they find inspiration in seeing the practical application of their classroom knowledge in real-world situations.

“As a computer scientist I definitely spend a lot of time staring at screens and data, but it’s been really cool to go out and actually work with the bees,” says Caelen Miller, a BYU computer science student working on the project. “I want to have it as a hobby for the rest of my life and honestly I’d love to keep studying them because they’re fascinating creatures.”

Because of BYU’s unique emphasis on undergraduate research, Warnick says he’s excited about the future application of this research and he’s impressed by the level of care BYU students bring to the project.

“Students here at BYU tend to be very focused on doing good in the world and building something amazing. They care very much about the way they’re going to use their education,” he said.

The lasting impact of the project could be far-reaching, especially for the agriculture industry, which relies on efficient pollination. With the ability to better understand and interpret bee waggle communications, farmers may optimize pollination strategies and plan more systematically, ultimately enhancing agricultural productivity and ecosystem health.

https://news.byu.edu/intellect/buzzworthy-breakthrough-byu-students-utilize-ai-to-decipher-the-language-of-the-bees

Honey bees have to balance effort, risk and reward, making rapid and accurate assessments of which flowers are mostly likely to offer food for their hive. Research published in the journal eLife today reveals how millions of years of evolution has engineered honey bees to make fast decisions and reduce risk.

The study enhances our understanding of insect brains, how our own brains evolved, and how to design better robots.

The paper presents a model of decision-making in bees and outlines the paths in their brains that enable fast decision-making. The study was led by Professor Andrew Barron from Macquarie University in Sydney, and Dr HaDi MaBouDi, Neville Dearden and Professor James Marshall from the University of Sheffield.

“Decision-making is at the core of cognition,” says Professor Barron. “It’s the result of an evaluation of possible outcomes, and animal lives are full of decisions. A honey bee has a brain smaller than a sesame seed. And yet she can make decisions faster and more accurately than we can. A robot programmed to do a bee’s job would need the back up of a supercomputer.

“Today’s autonomous robots largely work with the support of remote computing,” Professor Barron continues. “Drones are relatively brainless, they have to be in wireless communication with a data centre. This technology path will never allow a drone to truly explore Mars solo — NASA’s amazing rovers on Mars have travelled about 75 kilometres in years of exploration.”

Bees need to work quickly and efficiently, finding nectar and returning it to the hive, while avoiding predators. They need to make decisions. Which flower will have nectar? While they’re flying, they’re only prone to aerial attack. When they land to feed, they’re vulnerable to spiders and other predators, some of which use camouflage to look like flowers.

“We trained 20 bees to recognise five different coloured ‘flower disks’. Blue flowers always had sugar syrup,” says Dr MaBouDi. “Green flowers always had quinine [tonic water] with a bitter taste for bees. Other colours sometimes had glucose.”

“Then we introduced each bee to a ‘garden’ where the ‘flowers’ just had distilled water. We filmed each bee then watched more than 40 hours of video, tracking the path of the bees and timing how long it took them to make a decision.

“If the bees were confident that a flower would have food, then they quickly decided to land on it taking an average of 0.6 seconds),” says Dr MaBouDi. “If they were confident that a flower would not have food, they made a decision just as quickly.”

If they were unsure, then they took much more time — on average 1.4 seconds — and the time reflected the probability that a flower had food.

The team then built a computer model from first principles aiming to replicate the bees’ decision-making process. They found the structure of their computer model looked very similar to the physical layout of a bee brain.

“Our study has demonstrated complex autonomous decision-making with minimal neural circuitry,” says Professor Marshall. “Now we know how bees make such smart decisions, we are studying how they are so fast at gathering and sampling information. We think bees are using their flight movements to enhance their visual system to make them better at detecting the best flowers.”

AI researchers can learn much from insects and other ‘simple’ animals. Millions of years of evolution has led to incredibly efficient brains with very low power requirements. The future of AI in industry will be inspired by biology, says Professor Marshall, who co-founded Opteran, a company that reverse-engineers insect brain algorithms to enable machines to move autonomously, like nature.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/07/230710113824.htm

by Entomological Society of America

Responsible use of pesticides includes striving to avoid negative effects on the environment, often with an emphasis on protecting bees and other pollinators. A new study, however, finds that many common methods for minimizing pesticides’ impact on bees—even some recommendations on product labels—are backed by minimal scientific evidence.

The researchers behind the study say stronger testing is needed to evaluate which bee-protection measures are truly effective and which ones may be too reliant on conventional wisdom. They share their analysis in a report published in the Journal of Economic Entomology.

Growers are urged to follow a variety of “mitigation measures” meant to protect bees during pesticide applications, such as spraying at night, using specific nozzles on sprayers, or maintaining buffer zones.

“It takes time, money, and effort to follow these rules, so if they are not actually helpful, they are a waste of time,” says Edward Straw, Ph.D., a postdoctoral researcher in the School of Agriculture and Food Science at University College Dublin (UCD) in Ireland and lead author on the study. “If they are helpful, though, they could be applied more widely, to protect bees further.”

Straw and colleague Dara Stanley, Ph.D., assistant professor in applied entomology at UCD, combed published, peer-reviewed research for studies that evaluated the effectiveness of any kind of mitigation measure in reducing a pesticide’s impact on bees. Just 34 studies matched their criteria, spread across a wide range of measures—but largely focused on just one kind of bee.

“Almost all research was centered around protecting honey bees. However, honey bees are a managed species that is not endangered,” Straw says. “When we try to protect bees, we really want to be protecting wild, unmanaged bee species, as these are the species which are in decline.”

Few mitigation measures had more than one or two studies evaluating their effectiveness, and methods of testing varied. For instance, some studies tested for direct overspray while others tested for longer-term pesticide residues. And just three studies among Straw and Stanley’s review evaluated measures frequently found on pesticide labels.

“Least researched was testing on how you time a pesticide spray, be that time of day or time of year,” Straw says. “There’s good reason to believe that if you change when you spray, you could avoid peaks in bee activity. Yet surprisingly no one has really researched if this idea works. This is odd, as it’s a very common mitigation measure and not overly hard to test.”

Other mitigation measures tested in existing studies included how pesticides are applied (e.g., spray parameters or planting methods for pesticide-coated seeds), buffer zones, removing flowering weeds before spraying, direct interventions for managed bees (e.g., moving or covering colonies), and applying pesticides only in certain weather conditions or during certain crop stages.

A newer method had the most studies (12) investigating its potential: repellent additives to pesticide sprays, which encourage bees to avoid a recently sprayed crop. Several compounds have shown promise in lab testing, but all 12 studies tested repellency for honey bees only, and none were tested in formulation with a pesticide—only on their own.

“It is an interesting idea, but it is not yet ready to be used,” says Straw. “It would need to be tested on a diversity of bee and insect species, as if it is only repellent to one or two species, all the other bees would still be exposed to the pesticide.”

In sum, Straw and Stanley say too much hinges on bee-protective measures for them to be weakly supported. Bees play a critical role in both natural ecosystems and agriculture, and the presumption that mitigation measures are effective can be factored into decisions to authorize pesticides for use. Rigorous scientific evaluation of these measures is imperative, they say.

“The main limitation is that these studies need to be big, well-funded pieces of research. To test changes to how a pesticide is applied to a crop, you need to have a crop, a pesticide sprayer, and someone licensed to spray. All of that is expensive and time consuming, making it out of reach for most scientists,” says Straw.

But, if such research can be generated, there’s reason to believe it will have immediate positive impacts. In related research Straw and Stanely published earlier this year, compliance with pesticide regulations and guidelines among farmers in an anonymous survey was high. “We know that these mitigation measures are being followed,” says Straw. “We just do not know if they are helpful yet.”

https://phys.org/news/2023-07-common-methods-bees-pesticides.html

Overview
The purpose of the Resilient Food Systems Infrastructure (RFSI) program is to build resilience across the middle of the state’s food supply chain for food crops. For this program, “middle of the food supply chain” refers to activities and operations that occur in between post-harvesting of food crops and before food goods are being sold at a store or market, excluding the marketing of food products or services.
The RFSI program will offer two grant types, Equipment-Only and Infrastructure grants, to eligible entities to support the expanded capacity for the aggregation, processing, manufacturing, storing, transporting, wholesaling, and distribution of locally and regionally produced food products, including specialty crops, dairy, grains for human consumption, aquaculture, and other food products, excluding meat and poultry.
RFSI is intended to improve upon, provide new, and/or create more diverse, local, and regional market options for locally or regionally produced food in Texas; as well as create more economic opportunities and resiliency for communities, allowing them to retain more of the value chain dollar.
The program also aims to:
• Support development of value-added products available to consumers;
• Support proposals that provide fair prices, fair wages and new and safe job opportunities that keep profits in rural communities; and
• Increase diversity in processing options in terms of business model approaches, geography, and availability to underserved communities.
The Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) will prioritize grant applications that benefit the following:
• Underutilized farmers and ranchers;
• New and beginning farmers or ranchers;
• Veteran producers;
• Processors and other middle-of-the-supply businesses owned by individuals that qualify
under Small Business Administration (SBA) defined categories*
*Additional details will be defined in the Official Request for Grant Applications document

Who is eligible?
• Agricultural producers or processors or groups of producers/processors
• Nonprofit organizations operating middle-of-the-supply-chain activities
• Local government entities operating middle-of-the-supply-chain activities
• Tribal government entities operating middle-of-the-supply-chain activities
• Institutions such as schools, universities, or hospitals bringing producers together to establish
Is there a cost share or match required?
Equipment-Only Grants: no match required. Infrastructure Grants:
cooperative or shared infrastructure or invest in equipment that will benefit multiple producers
• 50% of the total project cost; or
• 25% of the total project cost, for underutilized farmers or for other businesses that qualify under Small
Business Administration (SBA) defined categories*
*Additional details will be defined in the Official Request for Grant Applications document
What can I use the funding for?
RFSI will focus on funding Equipment-Only and Infrastructure Grants with activities that:
• Expand capacity for processing, aggregation and distribution of agricultural products to create more and better markets for producers;
• Support development of value-added products available to consumers;
• Modernize manufacturing, tracking, storage, and information technology systems;
• Enhance worker safety through adoption of new technologies or investment in equipment or facility improvements;
• Improve the capacity of entities to comply with federal, state, and local food safety requirements;
• Improve operations through training opportunities, including training on the use of all equipment
purchased under the grant;
• Support the purchase and installation of specialized equipment, such as processing components, sorting equipment, packing and labeling equipment, or delivery vehicles;
• Modernize or expand an existing facility (including expansion and modifications to existing buildings and/or construction of new buildings at existing facilities);
• Support construction of a new facility for middle-of-the-supply-chain activities;
• Support construction of wastewater management structures, etc.;
• Modernize processing and manufacturing equipment through upgrades, repairs, or retooling;
• Develop, customize, or install equipment that reduces greenhouse gas emissions, increases efficiency in water use, improves air and/or water quality, and/or meets one or more of USDA’s climate action goals;
• Increase storage space, including cold storage

More information
Visit the RFSI web page at: https://www.texasagriculture.gov/RFSI

Contact us
For questions about the RFSI program, please email FoodSystems@TexasAgriculture.gov.

The TCEQ’s Texas Environmental Excellence Awards (TEEA) Program – an annual awards program that encourages citizens, communities, businesses, and organizations to be recognized for their environmental projects will be issuing awards soon.

These awards include a variety of categories such as agriculture, innovative operations, youth, and more. The Texas Commission on  Environmental Quality would encourage any beekeepers that have implemented successful environmental projects to apply!

The deadline to apply for the current awards cycle is August 25, 2023. For questions or to learn more, please feel free to contact us at awards@tceq.texas.gov.

In 2013, American Bird Conservancy published an important work titled  “The Impact of the Nation’s Most Widely Used Insecticides on Birds”  which identified the risks that neonicotinoid insecticides placed on both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, and the ripple effects on the birds and other wildlife species in those ecosystems.  One of the most egregious findings showed that a single neonic-coated seed is enough to kill a songbird. Unfortunately, in the ten years since that publication, very little has changed at the regulatory level to protect birds and other wildlife from this dangerous class of systemic chemicals. Unfortunately, the follow-up report published last week finds very little change in the past decade.

From Section 2.4 of the report:  
North American regulators, namely EPA, the PMRA and California DPR have attempted to assess the risk of the three high-use neonics to pollinators. Despite considerable time and resources devoted to this assessment, the end result is scientifically highly questionable… One key finding is that the risk of seed treatments – typically a large proportion of total use – for pollinators at large has been completely mischaracterized by the regulators through a series of fundamental flaws in the official assessment.

The three North American regulatory bodies – the EPA, California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and Canadian Pest Management PMRA  teamed up to produce a coordinated pollinator assessment….As reviewed in detail, the regulatory assessments; (1) underestimated risks to wild bee species and other pollinators by relying on honey bee colony survival as a proxy for pollinator health; (2) underestimated nectar and pollen contamination levels following the use of neonic-treated seeds by assuming that the majority of crop species would have residue values at the low end of the measured spectrum; (3) ignored risks of dust from neonic treated seeds at planting, despite ample evidence that this route of exposure is highly relevant; (4) ignored exposures of bees and other pollinators to neoniccontaminated water – including, guttation fluid and puddles in or near fields sown with neonic-treated seeds – despite existing field estimates that show that these routes of exposure can completely dwarf the routes that were formally assessed; and (5) ignored risks from neonic uses on crops deemed unattractive to honey bees, despite evidence that neonic residues migrate into adjoining areas, including adjacent wildflowers that can exceed levels in the field proper (see above); (6) excluded available peer-reviewed literature from quantitative risk assessment in favor of industry studies; and (7) ignored the growing amount of field data which now links the use of neonic-treated seeds to pollinator failure on a landscape scale. The assessment completely failed, therefore, to appreciate and acknowledge the considerable and damaging effect that neonic-treated seeds are having on pollinator populations and insect prey more broadly (Mineau 2020).

The Pollinator Stewardship Council and the American Bird Conservancy have often collaborated on legal and legislative advocacy work.  We greatly appreciate their contribution to the ever-increasing body of scientific research illustrating the catastrophic impacts of neonics.  Read the full report here. 

By Andrew Porterfield

Black queen cell virus is a serious problem for beekeepers. It infects developing queen honey bee larvae, turning other pupal cells black and ultimately killing the larval queen. The virus is capable of wiping out entire honey bee colonies and has no known deterrent beyond preventing its spread.

In 2020, when Canadian researchers were looking for viruses and other microbes spread by mosquitoes, a virus known for afflicting honey bees (Apis mellifera) was the last thing they expected to find. But they did.

As the researchers report in April in the Journal of Insect Science, for the first time, black queen cell virus (BQCV) has been discovered in North American mosquitoes. Also for the first time, researchers sequenced the virus’ genome.

Cole Baril, Christophe LeMoine, Ph.D., and Bryan Cassone, Ph.D., researchers at Brandon University in Manitoba, Canada, used a genetic sequencing method known as massively parallel next-generation sequencing to identify BQCV in a mosquito (Aedes vexans). The researchers believe that the mosquitoes indirectly acquired the virus by foraging at the same nectar sources as honey bees.

Since its discovery in 1955, BQCV has been known as one of the most common honey bee viruses. It is also one of the most poorly understood viruses affecting bees. Black queen cell virus infects queens and adult bees alike, but adults rarely show any symptoms of infections. It is part of the picornavirus order, and its genome consists of about 8,550 nucleotides of RNA. Exactly how it is transmitted from host to host is not fully understood. It may be spread by the microsporidia Nosema apis or by the Varroa mite, but it also may be transmitted by foraging expeditions of adult honey bees.

The scientists had been carrying out a genomics analysis of various mosquitoes in the Canadian prairie provinces. They identified several novel viruses and other microbial flora and were surprised to find BQCV during that search.

The Brandon researchers collected mosquitoes during 2019 and 2020 with miniature light traps. Aedes vexans mosquitoes were identified, and their RNA isolated. In 2019, 1,783 pooled mosquitos were sequenced; 2,208 were sequenced in 2020. The sequencing data was matched against BQCV sequences using the National Center for Biotech Information (NCBI) database.

The researchers also wanted to determine the evolutionary relationships within BQCVs and compared the new Canadian strain they’d found against existing viral genomes in the NCBI database. One of the sequencing reads matched a BQCV isolate from Sweden. No matches to Varroa mites or Nosema apis genomes were found, largely ruling out the potential for transmission through those organisms. However, three sequences were matched to plant chloroplasts and mapped to plants, trees and shrubs, indicating a foraging route of viral transmission.

Although mosquitoes need to feed on blood to produce eggs, flower nectar is also an important source of nutrition. Sugar deprivation is linked to reduced survival and reproduction capacity in females. However, no evidence exists showing that BQCV can replicate in mosquitoes, indicating that mosquitoes are a dead end for the viruses. But further research will be needed to determine if mosquitoes can transmit the virus to honey bees.

“To our knowledge, this is the first report of BQCV detected in mosquitoes or any other dipteran,” the authors write. “Interspecies transmission of BQCV has been hypothesized to be due to direct (parasitism, predation, and scavenging) and/or indirect (foraging at the same nectar source) interactions between honey bees and these arthropods.”

Cassone says much remains unknown. “The virus has been found in North America; however, never in mosquitoes and never has the genome sequence been characterized,” he says. “It is surprising to me that little work has been done with this virus given its potential determinantal impacts to apiculture.”

The study is also one of the first to use recently developed next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques to characterize the insect and virus genome. The researchers recommended the further use of NGS but with a caveat common to sequencing: “Although it requires considerable integration of bioinformatics, many limitations of traditional approaches for pathogen identification (PCR methods and serological testing) can be overcome using NGS. In addition to its greater resolution and sensitivity, NGS does not require a priori knowledge of the nucleic acid to be sequenced or specific antibodies.”

The Brandon researchers collected mosquitoes during 2019 and 2020 with miniature light traps. Aedes vexans mosquitoes were identified, and their RNA isolated. In 2019, 1,783 pooled mosquitos were sequenced; 2,208 were sequenced in 2020. The sequencing data was matched against BQCV sequences using the National Center for Biotech Information (NCBI) database.

The researchers also wanted to determine the evolutionary relationships within BQCVs and compared the new Canadian strain they’d found against existing viral genomes in the NCBI database. One of the sequencing reads matched a BQCV isolate from Sweden. No matches to Varroa mites or Nosema apis genomes were found, largely ruling out the potential for transmission through those organisms. However, three sequences were matched to plant chloroplasts and mapped to plants, trees and shrubs, indicating a foraging route of viral transmission.

Although mosquitoes need to feed on blood to produce eggs, flower nectar is also an important source of nutrition. Sugar deprivation is linked to reduced survival and reproduction capacity in females. However, no evidence exists showing that BQCV can replicate in mosquitoes, indicating that mosquitoes are a dead end for the viruses. But further research will be needed to determine if mosquitoes can transmit the virus to honey bees.

“To our knowledge, this is the first report of BQCV detected in mosquitoes or any other dipteran,” the authors write. “Interspecies transmission of BQCV has been hypothesized to be due to direct (parasitism, predation, and scavenging) and/or indirect (foraging at the same nectar source) interactions between honey bees and these arthropods.”

Cassone says much remains unknown. “The virus has been found in North America; however, never in mosquitoes and never has the genome sequence been characterized,” he says. “It is surprising to me that little work has been done with this virus given its potential determinantal impacts to apiculture.”

The study is also one of the first to use recently developed next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques to characterize the insect and virus genome. The researchers recommended the further use of NGS but with a caveat common to sequencing: “Although it requires considerable integration of bioinformatics, many limitations of traditional approaches for pathogen identification (PCR methods and serological testing) can be overcome using NGS. In addition to its greater resolution and sensitivity, NGS does not require a priori knowledge of the nucleic acid to be sequenced or specific antibodies.”

https://entomologytoday.org/2023/04/25/black-queen-cell-virus-honey-bees-mosquitoes/

WASHINGTON, June 22, 2023 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) today announced its selection of 50 projects for potential award, totaling approximately $300 million. These innovative projects will help improve access to land, capital, and markets for underserved farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners. The Increasing Land, Capital, and Market Access (Increasing Land Access) Program, which is funded by President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, works to increase access to farm ownership opportunities, improve results for those with heirs’ property or fractionated land, increase access to markets and capital that affect the ability to access land, and improve land ownership, land succession and agricultural business planning.

“Land access, market access and capital are critical to the success of the hardworking producers who keep agriculture thriving,” said Kelly Adkins, FSA State Executive Director in Texas. “Underserved producers have not had access to the amount of specialized technical support that would increase opportunities to access and capital and benefit the launch, growth, resilience, and success of their agricultural enterprises. The Increasing Land Access Program is part of the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to advancing equity for all, including people who have been underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by inequality, by providing the resources, tools and technical support needed to directly help local farmers and ensure we have a strong
agricultural system across the country.”

Examples of selectees for potential award in Texas include:
 Center for Heirs’ Property Preservation whose goals are (1) to increase land access for underserved landowners/producers so they can increase their opportunities to access capital and markets in agriculture which will result in viable farming/forestry operations and (2) build and deepen infrastructure in the subregion of East Texas, Arkansas, and Mississippi for addressing Heirs Property among black producers.

 Kansas Black Farmers Association, Inc. has a primary goal to address capital, market, and land access concerns with the end goals of 1) connecting more underserved producers and would-be producers to technical services and to increase the number of BIPOC owned and operated agribusinesses in the identified region; 2) providing producers and would-be producers with tangible capital assistance, and resources including continuing education to build industry and market awareness, down-payment and/or credit assistance; and 3) building various forms of community partnerships such as cooperatives and equipment sharing programs and a robust and long-lasting multi-generational education and mentorship program that will continue long after year five of the project.

 H.O.P.E. for Small Farm Sustainability will conduct The Victory Farms project to address barriers affecting beginning (Black, Indigenous, and people of color) BIPOC farmers, including refugees and asylum seekers. After partaking in peer-to-peer training, participants in the program will have the opportunity to practice farming through HOPE’s apprenticeship program, which allocates a 20’ x 20’ starter plot to farmers and provides specialized, hands-on training and mentorship. Farmers will receive larger plots once they begin scaling up production. Participants will have access to this land at no cost for up to three years, during which they can gain the education, experience, income, management skills, and brand awareness they will need to qualify for FSA loans and set up profitable long-term agribusinesses.

The tentative selectees include national, regional, and local projects that cover 40 states and territories including Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. USDA will work with the selected applicants to finalize the scope and funding levels in the coming months.

See the full list of Increasing Land Access Program selected projects.

Environmental Assessment

These projects will likely result in the purchase of land, construction of farm infrastructure and other activities that could have potential impacts on environmental resources. USDA has developed a Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the Increasing Land Access Program to evaluate the program’s overarching environmental impacts as they relate to the National Environmental Policy Act.

The environmental assessment is available online for public review. USDA is requesting comments on the program’s potential impact on the environment. The feedback will be incorporated into the final assessment, as appropriate, prior to a decision.

USDA will consider comments received by Friday, July 14, 2023, at 5 p.m. EDT. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent possible.

Comments may be submitted:
 Electronically at: Land.Access@usda.gov
 By mail at: Attn: Michael Mannigan, Grants Management Specialist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency, Outreach Office, 1400 Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, DC, 20250-0506

For more information, contact Michael Mannigan at Land.Access@usda.gov. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication should contact the USDA Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice).

More Information  
The Increasing Land Access Program was originally announced in August 2022 as part of a broader investment to help ensure underserved producers have the resources, tools, programs and technical support they need to succeed and is being funded by the Inflation Reduction Act.

The Increasing Land Access Program is part of USDA’s commitment to equity across the Department and steps it has taken under Secretary Vilsack’s direction to improve equity and access, eliminate barriers to its programs for underserved individuals and communities, and build a workforce more representative of America. Earlier in the year, the USDA Equity Commission, which is comprised of independent members from diverse backgrounds, released its interim recommendations to remove barriers to inclusion and access at USDA. The program is also an important component of the Department’s and President Biden’s vision to Advance Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.

USDA touches the lives of all Americans each day in so many positive ways. Under the Biden-Harris Administration, USDA is transforming America’s food system with a greater focus on more resilient local and regional food production; fairer markets for all producers; ensuring access to safe, healthy and nutritious food in all communities; building new markets and streams of income for farmers and producers using climate smart food and forestry practices; making historic investments in infrastructure and clean energy capabilities in rural America and committing to equity across the Department by removing systemic barriers and building a workforce more representative of America. To learn more, visit usda.gov.

#

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.