MOLINE, IL.&nbsp; (AP) —Deere executives said Wednesday that the company wouldn’t return to the bargaining table with striking workers because it wouldn’t offer a better contract than one they rejected that included immediate 10% raises.

Marc Howze, the chief administrative officer of Deere &amp; Co., said the deal the United Auto Workers&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-strikes-united-auto-workers-7124f0d5f729c0a722e62c87c94fc14a">union rejected</a>&nbsp;on Tuesday represented the most it could offer and still keep its costs competitive.

Howze declined to discuss how much the ongoing strike is costing Deere, which will release its next earnings report later this month. The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-illinois-moline-united-auto-workers-7e85b3d6aa34955f7c0be633e201c87f">disputed contract</a>&nbsp;would cover more than 10,000 Deere workers at 12 facilities in Iowa, Illinois and Kansas, who make the company’s iconic John Deere green tractors and other equipment.

The company plans to reach out to employees directly now to stress the virtues of its offer while it tries to keep its plants running with salaried employees and other workers to meet customer commitments. Other Deere plants globally are also working to pick up the slack.

“We want to make sure they understand the value of the agreement, to make sure they understand that there is nothing to be gained by continuing to hold out,” Howze said. “To some degree, because we were able to come to a resolution as quickly as we were, I think there’s some folks who believe there must be some more available.”

In addition to the initial raises, this week’s offer included 5% raises in the third and fifth years of the six-year deal, and it would have provided an $8,500 ratification bonus, preserved a pension option for new employees, made workers eligible for health insurance sooner and maintained their no-premium health insurance coverage.

UAW spokesman Brian Rothenberg said union leaders were meeting to discuss their next moves. With a majority of workers voting against the latest offer, union officials face demands to deliver more but that might be difficult given the Moline, Illinois-based company’s stance. And pressure to reach a settlement will mount the longer workers go without pay.

The vote Tuesday was much closer than when 90% of the workers&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-united-auto-workers-moline-strikes-447c2d911c1314c247011522e30f9bd2">rejected the company’s first offer</a>&nbsp;last month, but 55% of the workers still rejected the latest offer. Workers have been encouraged to seek more now because of the current worker shortages and Deere’s strong profits.

“It seems general membership feels emboldened by this current political moment of labor power. They’re pushing things further than the union leadership apparently wants to go,” said Victor Chen, a sociologist at Virginia Commonwealth University who studies labor. “It’s a gamble, but the economic wind is against their backs, given widespread supply chain problems and the current worker shortage.”

Deere officials, who have predicted that the company will report record profits of between $5.7 billion and $5.9 billion this fiscal year, don’t want to miss out on sales to farmers who are ready to buy thanks to strong crop prices. The U.S. Department of Agriculture predicts that farmers’ net income will increase by nearly 20% this year, to $113 billion.

Observers say the rejection of the deal shows pent-up anger among Deere workers over how much of its profits the company has been willing to share with workers.

“Although the proposed contract was a significant improvement over the previous offer, the Deere workers evidently felt that the company could afford more,” Fordham University sociologist Chris Rhomberg said. “For decades, wages across the economy have lagged behind productivity growth, and workers may be tired of seeing the gains from their efforts go predominantly to corporations making record-breaking earnings.”

Now the challenge for the UAW and Deere will be finding a way to resolve their differences in a way that workers will accept, said Todd Vachon, a former member of a carpenter’s union who now teaches about labor relations at Rutgers University.

“There is always the risk of overplaying one’s hand — on both sides, really,” Vachon said. “It appears the final mile will likely involve some changes to work rules and working conditions in addition to just wage increases.”

The longer the strike continues, the more painful it will become for everyone, Creighton University economist Ernie Goss said.

“During the dragging on, both sides lose,” Goss said. “Workers are looking at lost income. John Deere is looking at lost sales. So they both have sort of guns pointing at each other’s heads, economically speaking.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/10/1634596496067.png" alt="The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered only 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV" />
 <figcaption>The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered only 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV</figcaption>
 </figure>MOLINE, IL.&nbsp; (AP) —Deere executives said Wednesday that the company wouldn’t return to the bargaining table with striking workers because it wouldn’t offer a better contract than one they rejected that included immediate 10% raises.Marc Howze, the chief administrative officer of Deere &amp; Co., said the deal the United Auto Workers&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-strikes-united-auto-workers-7124f0d5f729c0a722e62c87c94fc14a">union rejected</a>&nbsp;on Tuesday represented the most it could offer and still keep its costs competitive.Howze declined to discuss how much the ongoing strike is costing Deere, which will release its next earnings report later this month. The&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-illinois-moline-united-auto-workers-7e85b3d6aa34955f7c0be633e201c87f">disputed contract</a>&nbsp;would cover more than 10,000 Deere workers at 12 facilities in Iowa, Illinois and Kansas, who make the company’s iconic John Deere green tractors and other equipment.The company plans to reach out to employees directly now to stress the virtues of its offer while it tries to keep its plants running with salaried employees and other workers to meet customer commitments. Other Deere plants globally are also working to pick up the slack.“We want to make sure they understand the value of the agreement, to make sure they understand that there is nothing to be gained by continuing to hold out,” Howze said. “To some degree, because we were able to come to a resolution as quickly as we were, I think there’s some folks who believe there must be some more available.”In addition to the initial raises, this week’s offer included 5% raises in the third and fifth years of the six-year deal, and it would have provided an $8,500 ratification bonus, preserved a pension option for new employees, made workers eligible for health insurance sooner and maintained their no-premium health insurance coverage.UAW spokesman Brian Rothenberg said union leaders were meeting to discuss their next moves. With a majority of workers voting against the latest offer, union officials face demands to deliver more but that might be difficult given the Moline, Illinois-based company’s stance. And pressure to reach a settlement will mount the longer workers go without pay.The vote Tuesday was much closer than when 90% of the workers&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-united-auto-workers-moline-strikes-447c2d911c1314c247011522e30f9bd2">rejected the company’s first offer</a>&nbsp;last month, but 55% of the workers still rejected the latest offer. Workers have been encouraged to seek more now because of the current worker shortages and Deere’s strong profits.“It seems general membership feels emboldened by this current political moment of labor power. They’re pushing things further than the union leadership apparently wants to go,” said Victor Chen, a sociologist at Virginia Commonwealth University who studies labor. “It’s a gamble, but the economic wind is against their backs, given widespread supply chain problems and the current worker shortage.”ADVERTISEMENTDeere officials, who have predicted that the company will report record profits of between $5.7 billion and $5.9 billion this fiscal year, don’t want to miss out on sales to farmers who are ready to buy thanks to strong crop prices. The U.S. Department of Agriculture predicts that farmers’ net income will increase by nearly 20% this year, to $113 billion.Observers say the rejection of the deal shows pent-up anger among Deere workers over how much of its profits the company has been willing to share with workers.“Although the proposed contract was a significant improvement over the previous offer, the Deere workers evidently felt that the company could afford more,” Fordham University sociologist Chris Rhomberg said. “For decades, wages across the economy have lagged behind productivity growth, and workers may be tired of seeing the gains from their efforts go predominantly to corporations making record-breaking earnings.”Now the challenge for the UAW and Deere will be finding a way to resolve their differences in a way that workers will accept, said Todd Vachon, a former member of a carpenter’s union who now teaches about labor relations at Rutgers University.“There is always the risk of overplaying one’s hand — on both sides, really,” Vachon said. “It appears the final mile will likely involve some changes to work rules and working conditions in addition to just wage increases.”The longer the strike continues, the more painful it will become for everyone, Creighton University economist Ernie Goss said.“During the dragging on, both sides lose,” Goss said. “Workers are looking at lost income. John Deere is looking at lost sales. So they both have sort of guns pointing at each other’s heads, economically speaking.”

Deere warns striking workers as walkout moves into 4th week

MOLINE, IL (AP) —Most workers at Deere &amp; Co. rejected a contract offer Tuesday that would have given them 10% raises and decided to remain on strike in the hopes of securing a better deal.

The raises in the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-illinois-moline-united-auto-workers-7e85b3d6aa34955f7c0be633e201c87f">new agreement</a>&nbsp;reached over the weekend were twice as big as the ones in the original offer United Auto Workers union members rejected last month, but those raises and improved benefits weren’t enough to end the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-united-auto-workers-moline-strikes-447c2d911c1314c247011522e30f9bd2">strike that began</a>&nbsp;on Oct. 14. The new agreement also would have provided an $8,500 ratification bonus, preserved a pension option for new employees, made workers eligible for health insurance sooner and maintained their no-premium health insurance coverage.

The disputed contract covers more than 10,000 Deere workers at 12 facilities in Iowa, Illinois and Kansas. A smaller group of about 100 workers at two Deere facilities in Colorado and Georgia voted to accept an identical deal.

The union said 55% of its members at the 12 main plants voted against this latest contract offer Tuesday.

Last month, 90% of union members also rejected a proposed contract that included immediate 5% raises for some workers and 6% for others, and 3% raises in 2023 and 2025.

Deere officials said they were disappointed the agreement was voted down.

“Through the agreements reached with the UAW, John Deere would have invested an additional $3.5 billion in our employees, and by extension, our communities, to significantly enhance wages and benefits that were already the best and most comprehensive in our industries,” said Marc A. Howze, Deere’s chief administrative officer. “This investment was the right one for Deere, our employees, and everyone we serve together.”

Tuesday’s vote means that the first major strike since 1986 will continue at the maker of agriculture and construction equipment. Currently, many companies are dealing with worker shortages, making workers feel&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-coronavirus-pandemic-4895e84ab6ed4bb61e9cb8d6c0bcfad5">emboldened&nbsp;</a>to demand more.

Forklift operator Irving Griffin, who has been with Deere for 11 years, told&nbsp;<a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/business/2021/11/02/john-deere-strikers-uaw-told-nation-watching-afl-cio-president-liz-shuler/6180383001/" target="_blank">the Des Moines Register</a>&nbsp;Monday that he planned to vote against the contract because he believed the company can offer even more.

Griffin said he thought workers should hold out for a better offer even though workers are receiving only $275 a week from the union while they’re on strike.

“Now is the best time to strike and take a stand for what we’re really worth,” he said to the newspaper.

Sales have been strong at the Moline, Illinois-based company this year as the economy continued to recover from the pandemic. Deere has predicted it will report record profits this year between $5.7 billion and $5.9 billion.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/10/1634596496067.png" alt="The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV" />
 <figcaption>The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV</figcaption>
 </figure>MOLINE, IL (AP) —Most workers at Deere &amp; Co. rejected a contract offer Tuesday that would have given them 10% raises and decided to remain on strike in the hopes of securing a better deal.The raises in the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-illinois-moline-united-auto-workers-7e85b3d6aa34955f7c0be633e201c87f">new agreement</a>&nbsp;reached over the weekend were twice as big as the ones in the original offer United Auto Workers union members rejected last month, but those raises and improved benefits weren’t enough to end the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-united-auto-workers-moline-strikes-447c2d911c1314c247011522e30f9bd2">strike that began</a>&nbsp;on Oct. 14. The new agreement also would have provided an $8,500 ratification bonus, preserved a pension option for new employees, made workers eligible for health insurance sooner and maintained their no-premium health insurance coverage.The disputed contract covers more than 10,000 Deere workers at 12 facilities in Iowa, Illinois and Kansas. A smaller group of about 100 workers at two Deere facilities in Colorado and Georgia voted to accept an identical deal.The union said 55% of its members at the 12 main plants voted against this latest contract offer Tuesday.Last month, 90% of union members also rejected a proposed contract that included immediate 5% raises for some workers and 6% for others, and 3% raises in 2023 and 2025.Deere officials said they were disappointed the agreement was voted down.“Through the agreements reached with the UAW, John Deere would have invested an additional $3.5 billion in our employees, and by extension, our communities, to significantly enhance wages and benefits that were already the best and most comprehensive in our industries,” said Marc A. Howze, Deere’s chief administrative officer. “This investment was the right one for Deere, our employees, and everyone we serve together.”Tuesday’s vote means that the first major strike since 1986 will continue at the maker of agriculture and construction equipment. Currently, many companies are dealing with worker shortages, making workers feel&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-health-coronavirus-pandemic-4895e84ab6ed4bb61e9cb8d6c0bcfad5">emboldened&nbsp;</a>to demand more.Forklift operator Irving Griffin, who has been with Deere for 11 years, told&nbsp;<a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/money/business/2021/11/02/john-deere-strikers-uaw-told-nation-watching-afl-cio-president-liz-shuler/6180383001/" target="_blank">the Des Moines Register</a>&nbsp;Monday that he planned to vote against the contract because he believed the company can offer even more.Griffin said he thought workers should hold out for a better offer even though workers are receiving only $275 a week from the union while they’re on strike.“Now is the best time to strike and take a stand for what we’re really worth,” he said to the newspaper.Sales have been strong at the Moline, Illinois-based company this year as the economy continued to recover from the pandemic. Deere has predicted it will report record profits this year between $5.7 billion and $5.9 billion.

Deere employees reject contract offer, will stay on strike

MOLINE, Ill. (AP) — Union workers at Deere &amp; Co. would get wage increases of 10% in the first year and 5% each in the third and fifth years under a tentative contract reached between the farm-equipment maker and the United Auto Workers union.

The workers would get 3% lump sums in the second, fourth and sixth years of the deal. They would also get a ratification bonus of $8,500 and no changes in the cost of their health insurance, according to a summary of the agreement posted Sunday on the union website.

The company and the UAW reached a tentative agreement Saturday that would cover more than 10,000 workers at 12 Deere locations in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/iowa">Iowa</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/illinois">Illinois</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/kansas">Kansas</a>. However, a strike that began Oct. 14 will continue while workers review the terms of the deal ahead of a ratification vote.

Union members previously rejected a proposed contract that included immediate 5% raises for some workers and 6% for others, and 3% raises in 2023 and 2025.

The Moline, Illinois-based company reported $4.7 billion in net income for the first nine months of its fiscal year, more than double the $2 billion of the same period a year earlier.

A labor shortage affecting many industries also gave workers more leverage to demand better pay and benefits.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/10/1634596496067.png" alt="The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV" />
 <figcaption>The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV</figcaption>
 </figure>MOLINE, Ill. (AP) — Union workers at Deere &amp; Co. would get wage increases of 10% in the first year and 5% each in the third and fifth years under a tentative contract reached between the farm-equipment maker and the United Auto Workers union.The workers would get 3% lump sums in the second, fourth and sixth years of the deal. They would also get a ratification bonus of $8,500 and no changes in the cost of their health insurance, according to a summary of the agreement posted Sunday on the union website.The company and the UAW reached a tentative agreement Saturday that would cover more than 10,000 workers at 12 Deere locations in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/iowa">Iowa</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/illinois">Illinois</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/kansas">Kansas</a>. However, a strike that began Oct. 14 will continue while workers review the terms of the deal ahead of a ratification vote.Union members previously rejected a proposed contract that included immediate 5% raises for some workers and 6% for others, and 3% raises in 2023 and 2025.The Moline, Illinois-based company reported $4.7 billion in net income for the first nine months of its fiscal year, more than double the $2 billion of the same period a year earlier.A labor shortage affecting many industries also gave workers more leverage to demand better pay and benefits.

Deere workers would get immediate 10% raises under new offer

By BRIAN GRIMMETT <a href="https://www.kmuw.org/2021-10-25/a-changing-climate-will-cost-kansas-farmers-millions-in-future-harvests">Kansas News Service</a>

WICHITA — Increased heat and drought driven by climate
 change could cost Kansas corn and soy growers tens of millions of 
dollars a year in yield losses by the end of the century.

A new study from Columbia University <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-021-00341-6.epdf?sharing_token=0MFzgyezlY2l2RVSPFYl8tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Nxppe7iyc5DE0aCBOZw3qYUSDEWDpVcYa-n-8smVqkj3kf-crK8k6SmirhXLpDvkmt1B7mP6eD4MbBgdWjTvelU5Fw-Cbc5rBGSn98iallrM3j5e3dbSRopylaq_wiQxsi3p2o2XOrOW0oW2QSEDmZS2kY4Z-go4NODZbp1PKgT8iUll48X9xg_nJeT8FmsbYLB1CYHeIg9jwF-uxzbMq3&amp;tracking_referrer=medialibrary.climatecentral.org" target="_blank">concluded that corn and soybean yields in Kansas will drop by as much as 20% to 30%</a>.
 But Kansas corn growers hope that better technology and research into 
drought-resistant varieties will offset potentially disastrous results.

The
 study looked beyond just the impacts of increasing temperatures, which 
is fairly well documented, and found where those higher temperatures 
also led to drier conditions.

“This is kind of a new risk we’ve 
uncovered,” said Corey Lesk, the lead author of the paper. “And it kind 
of adds up on top of the impact of warming itself.”

When analyzed 
together, the link between hot and dry conditions could cut corn and 
soybean yields by 5% worldwide compared to looking at the impacts of 
temperature increases alone.

In Kansas, where the coupling of 
higher temperatures and worse drought is expected to increase, the 
impact on corn and soybean harvests will be double what was previously 
expected.

Lesk and a team of researchers looked at historical 
records of crop yield and temperatures. They then made a separate map to
 look at moisture conditions over the same time period. The scientists 
found that places that were both hot and dry appear doomed to lose more 
of their ability to grow crops.

They then used climate models to project their findings into the future.

“The
 worst impact of warmer temperatures on those crop yields occurred in 
places where those couplings were the strongest,” Lesk said.

Corn 
is a $5 billion industry for Kansas. Decreased yields of that magnitude 
would cost some parts of the state as much as $40 million a year.

Greg Krissek, the CEO of <a href="https://kscorn.com/overview/" target="_blank">Kansas Corn</a> which represents corn growers and promotes the industry, said it’s already adapting to the changing climate and plans to use technology to limit future damage.

“We’ve
 got technology in the corn plant that is much more drought tolerant 
today than it certainly was 15 or 20 years ago,” he said.

He said 
whether it’s a better corn variety or irrigation upgrades that improve 
efficiency, technological advancements will prevent Kansas corn growers 
from experiencing the worst-case climate scenarios.

It’s helped so much already that in the past 15 years non-irrigated acres of corn in Kansas have increased more than irrigated.

“Kansas
 is very well placed to weather something like what this study might 
project because we’re already used to doing that,” Krissek said.

The
 paper also suggests the adoption of more sustainable agriculture 
practices, such as planting cover crops and no-till farming.

But 
ultimately, it suggests treating the problem, and not just the symptoms.
 That means attacking the primary cause of climate change by reducing 
the amount of greenhouse gasses we emit.

“If we’re worried about 
the impact of climate change on our crops and we really think that’s a 
problem, it’s got to translate to real climate policy that actually does
 something to reduce emissions,” Leak, the researcher said.

But 
whatever strategies farmers ultimately adopt, they’ll have to keep the 
progress going if they want to continue to overcome the expected 
changes.

“We need to make sure that we are taking the lead on 
recognizing that these are potential challenges we will be facing in the
 future,” said <a href="https://www.agronomy.k-state.edu/people/faculty/ciampitti-ignacio/" target="_blank">Ignacio Ciampitti</a>, professor of farming systems at Kansas State University.

He said research like the paper from Columbia, which he was not a part of, is another reminder of what’s at stake.

“We need to continue working on this,” Ciampitti said. “We cannot relax.”

Brian
 Grimmett reports on the environment, energy and natural resources for 
KMUW in Wichita and the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on 
Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/briangrimmett?lang=en" target="_blank">@briangrimmett</a> or email him at grimmett@kmuw.org.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/10/1635187475627.png" alt="A center pivot irrigates corn field in Kansas. Chris Neal / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption>A center pivot irrigates corn field in Kansas. Chris Neal / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>By BRIAN GRIMMETT <a href="https://www.kmuw.org/2021-10-25/a-changing-climate-will-cost-kansas-farmers-millions-in-future-harvests">Kansas News Service</a>WICHITA — Increased heat and drought driven by climate
 change could cost Kansas corn and soy growers tens of millions of 
dollars a year in yield losses by the end of the century.A new study from Columbia University <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-021-00341-6.epdf?sharing_token=0MFzgyezlY2l2RVSPFYl8tRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Nxppe7iyc5DE0aCBOZw3qYUSDEWDpVcYa-n-8smVqkj3kf-crK8k6SmirhXLpDvkmt1B7mP6eD4MbBgdWjTvelU5Fw-Cbc5rBGSn98iallrM3j5e3dbSRopylaq_wiQxsi3p2o2XOrOW0oW2QSEDmZS2kY4Z-go4NODZbp1PKgT8iUll48X9xg_nJeT8FmsbYLB1CYHeIg9jwF-uxzbMq3&amp;tracking_referrer=medialibrary.climatecentral.org" target="_blank">concluded that corn and soybean yields in Kansas will drop by as much as 20% to 30%</a>.
 But Kansas corn growers hope that better technology and research into 
drought-resistant varieties will offset potentially disastrous results.The
 study looked beyond just the impacts of increasing temperatures, which 
is fairly well documented, and found where those higher temperatures 
also led to drier conditions.“This is kind of a new risk we’ve 
uncovered,” said Corey Lesk, the lead author of the paper. “And it kind 
of adds up on top of the impact of warming itself.”When analyzed 
together, the link between hot and dry conditions could cut corn and 
soybean yields by 5% worldwide compared to looking at the impacts of 
temperature increases alone.In Kansas, where the coupling of 
higher temperatures and worse drought is expected to increase, the 
impact on corn and soybean harvests will be double what was previously 
expected.Lesk and a team of researchers looked at historical 
records of crop yield and temperatures. They then made a separate map to
 look at moisture conditions over the same time period. The scientists 
found that places that were both hot and dry appear doomed to lose more 
of their ability to grow crops.They then used climate models to project their findings into the future.“The
 worst impact of warmer temperatures on those crop yields occurred in 
places where those couplings were the strongest,” Lesk said.Corn 
is a $5 billion industry for Kansas. Decreased yields of that magnitude 
would cost some parts of the state as much as $40 million a year.Greg Krissek, the CEO of <a href="https://kscorn.com/overview/" target="_blank">Kansas Corn</a> which represents corn growers and promotes the industry, said it’s already adapting to the changing climate and plans to use technology to limit future damage.“We’ve
 got technology in the corn plant that is much more drought tolerant 
today than it certainly was 15 or 20 years ago,” he said.He said 
whether it’s a better corn variety or irrigation upgrades that improve 
efficiency, technological advancements will prevent Kansas corn growers 
from experiencing the worst-case climate scenarios.It’s helped so much already that in the past 15 years non-irrigated acres of corn in Kansas have increased more than irrigated.“Kansas
 is very well placed to weather something like what this study might 
project because we’re already used to doing that,” Krissek said.The
 paper also suggests the adoption of more sustainable agriculture 
practices, such as planting cover crops and no-till farming.But 
ultimately, it suggests treating the problem, and not just the symptoms.
 That means attacking the primary cause of climate change by reducing 
the amount of greenhouse gasses we emit.“If we’re worried about 
the impact of climate change on our crops and we really think that’s a 
problem, it’s got to translate to real climate policy that actually does
 something to reduce emissions,” Leak, the researcher said.But 
whatever strategies farmers ultimately adopt, they’ll have to keep the 
progress going if they want to continue to overcome the expected 
changes.“We need to make sure that we are taking the lead on 
recognizing that these are potential challenges we will be facing in the
 future,” said <a href="https://www.agronomy.k-state.edu/people/faculty/ciampitti-ignacio/" target="_blank">Ignacio Ciampitti</a>, professor of farming systems at Kansas State University.He said research like the paper from Columbia, which he was not a part of, is another reminder of what’s at stake.“We need to continue working on this,” Ciampitti said. “We cannot relax.”Brian
 Grimmett reports on the environment, energy and natural resources for 
KMUW in Wichita and the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on 
Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/briangrimmett?lang=en" target="_blank">@briangrimmett</a> or email him at grimmett@kmuw.org.

Changing climate will cost Kan. farmers millions in future harvests

KANSAS CITY (AP) — A judge on Wednesday issued a temporary restraining order that details how picketing workers at the Deere &amp; Co. plant in Davenport must conduct themselves.

In seeking the injunction Wednesday, Deere officials alleged that striking workers had disrupted access to the Davenport Works plant and put others at risk.

District Court Judge Marlita Greve ordered the union to allow only four picketers at a time near the gates of the plant. The order also banned the use of chairs and barrel fires, and prohibited picketers from harassing or intimidating people entering and leaving the plant.

Deere spokeswoman Jen Hartmann said the company sought the injunction to provide a safe environment for contractors and employees, including those participating in the strike.

The injunction prohibits picketing or congregating “near the Contractor Gate entrance,” which is regarded a neutral gate that cannot be picketed, according to Deere.

The United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-united-auto-workers-moline-strikes-447c2d911c1314c247011522e30f9bd2">went on strike&nbsp;</a>on Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract. Contract negotiations have resumed.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture and former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack met with striking workers Wednesday at Deere’s plant in Ankeny. Vilsack told the union workers that he stood with them, noting the UAW had long supported him in his political career, WHO-TV&nbsp;<a href="https://who13.com/news/tom-vilsack-repays-support-to-uaw-members-with-visit-to-john-deere-picket-line/" target="_blank">reported</a>.

A contract would cover 10,000 striking workers at 14 Deere plants, including seven in Iowa, four in Illinois and one each in Kansas, Colorado and Georgia.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/10/1634596496067.png" alt="The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV" />
 <figcaption>The strike began Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY (AP) — A judge on Wednesday issued a temporary restraining order that details how picketing workers at the Deere &amp; Co. plant in Davenport must conduct themselves.In seeking the injunction Wednesday, Deere officials alleged that striking workers had disrupted access to the Davenport Works plant and put others at risk.District Court Judge Marlita Greve ordered the union to allow only four picketers at a time near the gates of the plant. The order also banned the use of chairs and barrel fires, and prohibited picketers from harassing or intimidating people entering and leaving the plant.Deere spokeswoman Jen Hartmann said the company sought the injunction to provide a safe environment for contractors and employees, including those participating in the strike.The injunction prohibits picketing or congregating “near the Contractor Gate entrance,” which is regarded a neutral gate that cannot be picketed, according to Deere.The United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-united-auto-workers-moline-strikes-447c2d911c1314c247011522e30f9bd2">went on strike&nbsp;</a>on Oct. 14 after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract. Contract negotiations have resumed.U.S. Secretary of Agriculture and former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack met with striking workers Wednesday at Deere’s plant in Ankeny. Vilsack told the union workers that he stood with them, noting the UAW had long supported him in his political career, WHO-TV&nbsp;<a href="https://who13.com/news/tom-vilsack-repays-support-to-uaw-members-with-visit-to-john-deere-picket-line/" target="_blank">reported</a>.A contract would cover 10,000 striking workers at 14 Deere plants, including seven in Iowa, four in Illinois and one each in Kansas, Colorado and Georgia.

Restraining order: Strike at Deere plants moves into 2nd week

MOLINE, Ill. (AP) — Contract talks between Deere &amp; Co. and its 10,000 striking workers have resumed, but it wasn't immediately clear how far apart the two sides remained Monday.

Both the Moline,&nbsp;Illinois-based company and the United Auto Workers union confirmed that talks had resumed.

The strike began last Thursday after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.

Deere spokeswoman Jen Hartmann said the company remains “committed to the collective bargaining process and resolving the strike.”

The last major strike at the maker of agricultural and construction equipment came in 1986. This year's strike comes as companies are dealing with worker shortages. Deere had predicted it would report record profits this year between $5.7 billion and $5.9 billion on strong sales.

The contracts under negotiation cover 14 Deere plants, including seven in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/iowa">Iowa</a>, four in Illinois and one each in&nbsp;Kansas,&nbsp;Colorado&nbsp;and&nbsp;Georgia.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/10/1634596496067.png" alt="The strike began last Thursday after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV" />
 <figcaption>The strike began last Thursday after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.-Photo courtesy WQAD TV</figcaption>
 </figure>MOLINE, Ill. (AP) — Contract talks between Deere &amp; Co. and its 10,000 striking workers have resumed, but it wasn't immediately clear how far apart the two sides remained Monday.Both the Moline,&nbsp;Illinois-based company and the United Auto Workers union confirmed that talks had resumed.The strike began last Thursday after union members overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that would have delivered 5% raises to some workers and 6% raises to others depending on their positions in the factory.Deere spokeswoman Jen Hartmann said the company remains “committed to the collective bargaining process and resolving the strike.”The last major strike at the maker of agricultural and construction equipment came in 1986. This year's strike comes as companies are dealing with worker shortages. Deere had predicted it would report record profits this year between $5.7 billion and $5.9 billion on strong sales.The contracts under negotiation cover 14 Deere plants, including seven in&nbsp;<a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/iowa">Iowa</a>, four in Illinois and one each in&nbsp;Kansas,&nbsp;Colorado&nbsp;and&nbsp;Georgia.

Contract talks resume between Deere and its striking workers

By DANIAL VOCK <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2021/09/19/struggle-over-tax-break-for-inherited-farmland-churns-below-surface-in-reconciliation-bill/">Kansas Reflector</a>

WASHINGTON — Agricultural groups and 
farm-state lawmakers notched a significant win when U.S. House Democrats
 chose not to touch a big tax break for inherited property, avoiding for
 now a confrontation.

But opponents remain wary
 that the idea could come back at any time as Democrats shape their 
massive $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation package, and search for ways
 to help pay for the most significant expansion of the social safety net
 since the New Deal.

Farm lobbies and Republicans, along 
with influential Democrats like House Agriculture Chairman David Scott 
of Georgia, strongly objected to tax changes that President Joe Biden 
proposed in his “Build Back Better” plan for farmland and other assets 
handed from one generation to the next.&nbsp;

Biden, along with Agriculture 
Secretary Tom Vilsack, wanted to end the “stepped-up basis” for 
determining capital gains taxes on those assets. Vilsack, the former 
governor of Iowa, has taken to the pages of The Wall Street Journal and
 popped into a White House press briefing to make the case that closing 
loopholes like these is necessary to make sure the wealthy pay their 
fair share.

Over the next decade, the 
administration’s plan for taxing farmland inheritances could bring in as
 much as $322 billion in new federal tax revenues.

But U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra, an Iowa
 Republican, said farmers in his district have been complaining to him 
about the proposal ever since it was unveiled earlier this year. The 
farmers, he said, are worried that a new tax scheme would make it 
impossible to keep farms in the family.

“Let’s say a mom and dad bought their
 farm at $2,000 an acre, and now it’s worth $12,000 an acre. If they 
want to give it to their son or daughter or whoever, (the heir) would 
have to pay tax on the difference of that,” Feenstra said in an 
interview with States Newsroom.

“A son or a daughter wouldn’t have 
that money, so they’d have to sell the land to pay the tax,” he 
continued. The buyer would most likely be a large corporation, not a 
local farmer, he said. “That’s why so many people are worried that it 
will destroy the family farm, literally destroy the family farm.”

Proponents for the change say those 
concerns are overblown or easily addressed through policy tweaks. But 
the emotional pleas to save small-town America appear to have won this 
round.

Democrats on the House Ways and Means
 Committee, the group that handled the tax aspects of Biden’s economic 
revival plan, left out the president’s proposed changes to the 
stepped-up basis when they approved their piece of the reconciliation 
bill last week.

The idea could reemerge later, as the
 package continues its journey through the House and Senate. But the 
committee’s decision reflects how politically radioactive the idea has 
become.&nbsp;

Several <a target="_blank" href="https://axne.house.gov/sites/axne.house.gov/files/5.6.21%20Stepped%20Up%20Basis%20Final.pdf">Democrats balked</a> at Biden’s proposal, as well. Scott, the chair of the House Agriculture Committee, <a target="_blank" href="https://agriculture.house.gov/uploadedfiles/06022021letter.pdf?utm_campaign=1099-520">wrote the president</a>
 in June, arguing that the stepped-up basis was “a critical tool 
enabling family farming operations to continue from generation to 
generation.”

“I have been working tirelessly to 
ensure that stepped-up basis is protected,” Scott said in a statement 
last week, “and I am very pleased that the package released does not 
impact the benefit’s operation.”

But Vilsack, who owns 600 acres of 
farmland, argues that the stepped-up basis is really just a way for rich
 people to avoid paying taxes.

“This policy has allowed the wealthy to amass large fortunes,” Vilsack <a target="_blank" href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/vilsack-biden-tax-changes-step-up-in-basis-estate-death-tax-family-farm-small-business-11631116907">wrote</a> earlier this month in The Wall Street Journal.&nbsp;

“Millionaires and billionaires borrow
 against their assets, usually stock or real estate, but also art and 
collectibles, really anything a bank will lend against. When those 
assets are transferred upon death, their heirs can sell the property 
without being taxed to pay off the debt. This is one of the most popular
 ways the rich avoid taxation, and it must end.”

The agriculture secretary said Biden’s proposal had special protections for family farms.&nbsp;

First, the administration wanted to 
impose the capital gains tax only when the heir sold the property. So in
 Feenstra’s example, the son or daughter wouldn’t have to pay taxes when
 they inherited the farm, only when they sold it.&nbsp;

Second, Vilsack said that the Biden 
plan would exempt all capital gains of up to $2.5 million. He claimed 
that 95 percent of family farms would not owe anything with that level 
of an exemption.

Marc Goldwein, a senior vice 
president and senior policy director for the Committee for a Responsible
 Federal Budget, said the fact that House Democrats so far have not 
included changes to the stepped-up basis was a “discouraging starting 
point.”&nbsp;

Getting rid of the policy, he said, should be a “no-brainer.”

“You want tax policy that treats 
people in similar situations similarly, that doesn’t create bad 
incentives and that raises revenue in a progressive way,” he said. 
“Stepped-up basis fails all three of those.”

It makes no sense, he argued, that 
someone who sold their property the day before they died would have to 
pay capital gains on it, but that someone who inherited the same 
property and sold it a day later would have to pay none.&nbsp;

The policy encourages people to hold 
on to their assets longer than they otherwise would, just to avoid 
taxation. And it disproportionately benefits rich taxpayers, Goldwein 
said.&nbsp;&nbsp;

He also said the policy mostly affects people with assets other than farms.&nbsp;

A 2014 U.S. Treasury study, for 
example, found that farm assets made up only 2 percent of the fair 
market value of assets that are protected by the policy.&nbsp;

Stocks and bonds, on the other hand, made up more than half of the value of protected assets.

But Dustin Sherer, the director of 
congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said 
the administration is underplaying the potential consequences for 
farmers if stepped-up basis is removed.

While Vilsack touted the 
administration’s proposed exemption of the first $2.5 million of capital
 gains, Sherer noted, that would not be enough to shield farmers with a 
typical 500-acre farm in Vilsack’s home state of Iowa.&nbsp;

There are more than 18,000 farms in Iowa that are bigger than 500 acres, Sherer said.

“More to the point,” Sherer asked, “if you’re trying to go after billionaires, why is $2.5 million your exemption level?”

And the administration’s proposal to 
impose the capital gains tax when property is sold, rather than when it 
is inherited, still causes problems, Sherer said.&nbsp;

The lingering tax obligation would make it harder for the new property owner to take out a loan, for example.

“It completely changes the dynamics of the transfer,” he said.

Sherer said he was encouraged that 
the policy hasn’t gained traction in the House so far, but he worries 
that it could become part of the deal later.

“As long as politicians in D.C. are looking for money to offset their spending, it’s not over,” he said.

The reconciliation bill now goes to 
the House Budget Committee, which will consolidate input from other 
House committees. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she wants the full 
chamber to vote on the package before the end of the month, but that 
deadline could slip.&nbsp;

Daniel C. Vock is a correspondent for the States Newsroom Washington, D.C., bureau.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/9/1632147076214.jpeg" alt="Farm lobbies and Republicans object to changes in how taxes are applied to farmland and other assets as they are handed down from one generation to another. Pixabay photo" />
 <figcaption>Farm lobbies and Republicans object to changes in how taxes are applied to farmland and other assets as they are handed down from one generation to another. Pixabay photo</figcaption>
 </figure>By DANIAL VOCK <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2021/09/19/struggle-over-tax-break-for-inherited-farmland-churns-below-surface-in-reconciliation-bill/">Kansas Reflector</a>WASHINGTON — Agricultural groups and 
farm-state lawmakers notched a significant win when U.S. House Democrats
 chose not to touch a big tax break for inherited property, avoiding for
 now a confrontation.But opponents remain wary
 that the idea could come back at any time as Democrats shape their 
massive $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation package, and search for ways
 to help pay for the most significant expansion of the social safety net
 since the New Deal.Farm lobbies and Republicans, along 
with influential Democrats like House Agriculture Chairman David Scott 
of Georgia, strongly objected to tax changes that President Joe Biden 
proposed in his “Build Back Better” plan for farmland and other assets 
handed from one generation to the next.&nbsp;Biden, along with Agriculture 
Secretary Tom Vilsack, wanted to end the “stepped-up basis” for 
determining capital gains taxes on those assets. Vilsack, the former 
governor of Iowa, has taken to the pages of The Wall Street Journal and
 popped into a White House press briefing to make the case that closing 
loopholes like these is necessary to make sure the wealthy pay their 
fair share.Over the next decade, the 
administration’s plan for taxing farmland inheritances could bring in as
 much as $322 billion in new federal tax revenues.But U.S. Rep. Randy Feenstra, an Iowa
 Republican, said farmers in his district have been complaining to him 
about the proposal ever since it was unveiled earlier this year. The 
farmers, he said, are worried that a new tax scheme would make it 
impossible to keep farms in the family.“Let’s say a mom and dad bought their
 farm at $2,000 an acre, and now it’s worth $12,000 an acre. If they 
want to give it to their son or daughter or whoever, (the heir) would 
have to pay tax on the difference of that,” Feenstra said in an 
interview with States Newsroom.“A son or a daughter wouldn’t have 
that money, so they’d have to sell the land to pay the tax,” he 
continued. The buyer would most likely be a large corporation, not a 
local farmer, he said. “That’s why so many people are worried that it 
will destroy the family farm, literally destroy the family farm.”<h2>Emotional pleas</h2>Proponents for the change say those 
concerns are overblown or easily addressed through policy tweaks. But 
the emotional pleas to save small-town America appear to have won this 
round.Democrats on the House Ways and Means
 Committee, the group that handled the tax aspects of Biden’s economic 
revival plan, left out the president’s proposed changes to the 
stepped-up basis when they approved their piece of the reconciliation 
bill last week.The idea could reemerge later, as the
 package continues its journey through the House and Senate. But the 
committee’s decision reflects how politically radioactive the idea has 
become.&nbsp;Several <a target="_blank" href="https://axne.house.gov/sites/axne.house.gov/files/5.6.21%20Stepped%20Up%20Basis%20Final.pdf">Democrats balked</a> at Biden’s proposal, as well. Scott, the chair of the House Agriculture Committee, <a target="_blank" href="https://agriculture.house.gov/uploadedfiles/06022021letter.pdf?utm_campaign=1099-520">wrote the president</a>
 in June, arguing that the stepped-up basis was “a critical tool 
enabling family farming operations to continue from generation to 
generation.”“I have been working tirelessly to 
ensure that stepped-up basis is protected,” Scott said in a statement 
last week, “and I am very pleased that the package released does not 
impact the benefit’s operation.”But Vilsack, who owns 600 acres of 
farmland, argues that the stepped-up basis is really just a way for rich
 people to avoid paying taxes.“This policy has allowed the wealthy to amass large fortunes,” Vilsack <a target="_blank" href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/vilsack-biden-tax-changes-step-up-in-basis-estate-death-tax-family-farm-small-business-11631116907">wrote</a> earlier this month in The Wall Street Journal.&nbsp;“Millionaires and billionaires borrow
 against their assets, usually stock or real estate, but also art and 
collectibles, really anything a bank will lend against. When those 
assets are transferred upon death, their heirs can sell the property 
without being taxed to pay off the debt. This is one of the most popular
 ways the rich avoid taxation, and it must end.”The agriculture secretary said Biden’s proposal had special protections for family farms.&nbsp;First, the administration wanted to 
impose the capital gains tax only when the heir sold the property. So in
 Feenstra’s example, the son or daughter wouldn’t have to pay taxes when
 they inherited the farm, only when they sold it.&nbsp;Second, Vilsack said that the Biden 
plan would exempt all capital gains of up to $2.5 million. He claimed 
that 95 percent of family farms would not owe anything with that level 
of an exemption.<h2>A no-brainer?</h2>Marc Goldwein, a senior vice 
president and senior policy director for the Committee for a Responsible
 Federal Budget, said the fact that House Democrats so far have not 
included changes to the stepped-up basis was a “discouraging starting 
point.”&nbsp;Getting rid of the policy, he said, should be a “no-brainer.” 
“You want tax policy that treats 
people in similar situations similarly, that doesn’t create bad 
incentives and that raises revenue in a progressive way,” he said. 
“Stepped-up basis fails all three of those.”It makes no sense, he argued, that 
someone who sold their property the day before they died would have to 
pay capital gains on it, but that someone who inherited the same 
property and sold it a day later would have to pay none.&nbsp;The policy encourages people to hold 
on to their assets longer than they otherwise would, just to avoid 
taxation. And it disproportionately benefits rich taxpayers, Goldwein 
said.&nbsp;&nbsp;He also said the policy mostly affects people with assets other than farms.&nbsp;A 2014 U.S. Treasury study, for 
example, found that farm assets made up only 2 percent of the fair 
market value of assets that are protected by the policy.&nbsp;Stocks and bonds, on the other hand, made up more than half of the value of protected assets.<h2>Consequences for farmers</h2>But Dustin Sherer, the director of 
congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said 
the administration is underplaying the potential consequences for 
farmers if stepped-up basis is removed.While Vilsack touted the 
administration’s proposed exemption of the first $2.5 million of capital
 gains, Sherer noted, that would not be enough to shield farmers with a 
typical 500-acre farm in Vilsack’s home state of Iowa.&nbsp;There are more than 18,000 farms in Iowa that are bigger than 500 acres, Sherer said.“More to the point,” Sherer asked, “if you’re trying to go after billionaires, why is $2.5 million your exemption level?”And the administration’s proposal to 
impose the capital gains tax when property is sold, rather than when it 
is inherited, still causes problems, Sherer said.&nbsp;The lingering tax obligation would make it harder for the new property owner to take out a loan, for example.“It completely changes the dynamics of the transfer,” he said.Sherer said he was encouraged that 
the policy hasn’t gained traction in the House so far, but he worries 
that it could become part of the deal later.“As long as politicians in D.C. are looking for money to offset their spending, it’s not over,” he said.The reconciliation bill now goes to 
the House Budget Committee, which will consolidate input from other 
House committees. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she wants the full 
chamber to vote on the package before the end of the month, but that 
deadline could slip.&nbsp;Daniel C. Vock is a correspondent for the States Newsroom Washington, D.C., bureau.

Struggle over tax break for inherited farmland churns in budget bill

By ARIANA FIGUEROA <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2021/07/06/white-house-says-executive-order-coming-on-labeling-beef-as-a-product-of-usa/">Kansas Reflector</a>

WASHINGTON
 — The White House will unveil an executive order in the coming days 
that directs the U.S. Department of Agriculture to clarify that meat can
 only receive a “Product of USA” label if that livestock is raised in 
the U.S. rather than abroad, press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters 
Tuesday.

“The
 EO directs USDA to develop a plan to increase opportunities for farmers
 to access markets and receive a fair return, including supporting 
alternative food distribution systems like farmers markets and 
developing standards and labels so that consumers can choose to buy 
products that treat farmers and agriculture workers fairly,” Psaki said.

Psaki
 said that the executive order will make it easier for farmers to 
economically compete against international meat industries.

Under
 current labeling rules, most grass fed beef labeled “Product of USA” is
 actually raised and slaughtered abroad, but imported to the United 
States for processing.

“The
 president and the USDA believe it is unfair for domestic farmers and 
ranchers to have to compete with foreign companies that are misleading 
consumers,” she said.

USDA
 Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement last week that the agency 
would initiate a “top-to-bottom” review of the “Product of USA” label 
that will help determine what the label means to consumers. The 
announcement followed <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2021/07/ftc-issues-rule-deter-rampant-made-usa-fraud">a Federal Trade Commission move </a>on strengthening the labeling.

“We
 have taken note of the many comments submitted to USDA and the FTC 
regarding meat labeling and understand that the current ‘Product of USA’
 label on meat products may no longer effectively serve either of those 
purposes, to the detriment of consumers, producers, and fair and 
competitive markets,” said Vilsack.

Psaki
 said the order also aims to make it easier for farmers to bring claims 
against corporate agriculture companies under the Packers and Stockyards
 Act to prevent chicken processors from underpaying farmers, and would 
protect from retaliation those farmers who report companies that are not
 following the rules.

Ariana Figueroa covers the nation's capital for States Newsroom, a network of state-based nonprofit news outlets that includes Kansas Reflector.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/7/1625690364448.png" alt="The White House plans to issue an executive order to clarify the labeling for beef produced in the United States, the president's press secretary said Tuesday. (May 10, 2021, photo by Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>The White House plans to issue an executive order to clarify the labeling for beef produced in the United States, the president's press secretary said Tuesday. (May 10, 2021, photo by Tim Carpenter/Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure>By ARIANA FIGUEROA <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2021/07/06/white-house-says-executive-order-coming-on-labeling-beef-as-a-product-of-usa/">Kansas Reflector</a>WASHINGTON
 — The White House will unveil an executive order in the coming days 
that directs the U.S. Department of Agriculture to clarify that meat can
 only receive a “Product of USA” label if that livestock is raised in 
the U.S. rather than abroad, press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters 
Tuesday.“The
 EO directs USDA to develop a plan to increase opportunities for farmers
 to access markets and receive a fair return, including supporting 
alternative food distribution systems like farmers markets and 
developing standards and labels so that consumers can choose to buy 
products that treat farmers and agriculture workers fairly,” Psaki said.Psaki
 said that the executive order will make it easier for farmers to 
economically compete against international meat industries.Under
 current labeling rules, most grass fed beef labeled “Product of USA” is
 actually raised and slaughtered abroad, but imported to the United 
States for processing.“The
 president and the USDA believe it is unfair for domestic farmers and 
ranchers to have to compete with foreign companies that are misleading 
consumers,” she said.USDA
 Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement last week that the agency 
would initiate a “top-to-bottom” review of the “Product of USA” label 
that will help determine what the label means to consumers. The 
announcement followed <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2021/07/ftc-issues-rule-deter-rampant-made-usa-fraud">a Federal Trade Commission move </a>on strengthening the labeling.“We
 have taken note of the many comments submitted to USDA and the FTC 
regarding meat labeling and understand that the current ‘Product of USA’
 label on meat products may no longer effectively serve either of those 
purposes, to the detriment of consumers, producers, and fair and 
competitive markets,” said Vilsack.Psaki
 said the order also aims to make it easier for farmers to bring claims 
against corporate agriculture companies under the Packers and Stockyards
 Act to prevent chicken processors from underpaying farmers, and would 
protect from retaliation those farmers who report companies that are not
 following the rules.Ariana Figueroa covers the nation's capital for States Newsroom, a network of state-based nonprofit news outlets that includes Kansas Reflector.

White House: ‘Product of USA’ executive order coming for beef industry

By BRIAN GRIMMETT <a href="https://www.kmuw.org/post/kansas-farmers-find-only-thing-harder-growing-hemp-selling-it">Kansas News Service</a>

PRATT, Kansas — This summer marks the third year that Kansans have grown hemp for industrial uses.

Yet
 growing the less sexy cousin of the plant associated with getting high 
and some medicinal uses has proven riskier and more difficult than many 
farmers initially expected.

Consequently, the number of licenses issued this year is less than half of what the state saw in 2020.

“There
 were some misconceptions about the ease of marketability of it,” said 
Braden Hoch, the state’s industrial hemp program supervisor.

The risk of any agricultural operation is compounded by an ever-changing set of <a href="https://agriculture.ks.gov/divisions-programs/plant-protect-weed-control/industrial-hemp" target="_blank">state and federal rules</a>. And now some hemp farmers and processors want more help from the government to reduce risk and encourage innovation.

<a href="https://www.shiningstarhemp.com/" target="_blank">Shining Star Hemp Co.</a> is one of only 11 licensed hemp processors in the state.

Outside
 of the industrial building near the Pratt municipal airport in 
south-central Kansas where Shining Star operates sits rows of 1,200 
pound bags full of industrial hemp stalks, grains and flowers.

Inside,
 workers break open the bags and dump them onto a large conveyor belt 
leading to a cacophony of machinery shaking, blowing and sifting the 
biomass into its usable parts.

The operation is one of the few successful outfits in the state.

“It’s
 been a lot of work, a lot of phone calls developing relationships and 
finding synergies,” Jennifer Holmes, who works with Shining Star <a href="https://plainjanehempco.com/" target="_blank">to develop and market products</a> said. “But honestly, I can say at this point, we’re doing awesome for where we’re at.”

Paul McGeary masterminded Shining Star’s system for converting the hemp harvest into something industry can use.

“It’s about, probably, 30 years of beating your head against the wall, mostly,” he said.

McGeary
 is a contractor for Shining Star. He’s worked in the agricultural 
processing world for most of his life and has applied what he learned 
over decades of sifting wheat and corn to develop this machine to sift 
hemp.

He said the complexity of the process is part of what’s 
holding the industry back. It just doesn’t have the scale to supply 
manufacturers who would put the fiber to use.

“We were walking 
into those meetings thinking that to have 30-to- 40,000 pounds on hand 
is something. But when you walk into industry and they want five train 
cars a day or a trainload a week, we just aren’t prepared for that,” he 
said. “And getting them to wait until we’re prepared, that’s the 
bottleneck of the whole thing.”

Hemp has been hyped as something 
with a wide range of industrial uses. The stalk can be made into paper 
or biodegradable plastics. The seeds can be made into food. And the 
flowers can be pressed to extract oils.

But so far, the only 
market the industry is pushing seems to be for its cannabinoid-rich, or 
CBD, oil. And there’s a flood of CBD already on the market.

“We 
don’t have the best of luck selling full-spectrum oil,” Holmes said. 
“It’s just something that we all need to work through and do the right 
thing and move into the grain and fiber industry.”

But that will take millions of dollars in investments in new equipment.

Until
 that equipment can be designed, built or purchased, companies 
interested in making products from hemp fibers are out of luck. A 
company in Newton, Kansas, wants to <a href="https://humanplantsolutions.com/" target="_blank">make prosthetic limbs from hemp</a>. It imports its processed hemp from overseas.

Holmes
 wants more government help to offset some of the risk for investing in 
converting the plant into something useful for industry.

“A lot 
of people are scared to start because they don’t know if they’re going 
to fail, so they don’t ever get started,” she said.

The Kansas Department of Agriculture says its hemp growing licenses dropped&nbsp; from 218 in 2020, to only 81 this year.

And last year, of the almost 4,000 acres planted, only 761 were harvested for production.

An eighth of that had to be burned by the state because it contained too much of the psychoactive chemical THC.

“The
 past two years have really helped individuals get up to speed,” Hoch 
said. “But producers are really still determining the best way to grow 
hemp as a crop and if it’s feasible to include in their rotation.”

He
 said growers and processors need to expand beyond CBD products, but 
with federal and state rules surrounding the crop in constant flux, 
finding the right investors that can spur that kind of innovation and 
development will remain challenging.

Brian Grimmett reports 
on the environment, energy and natural resources for KMUW in Wichita and
 the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/briangrimmett?lang=en">@briangrimmett</a> or email him at grimmett@kmuw.org.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/6/1623692445108.png" alt=" Workers at Shining Star Hemp Co. load a bag of hemp biomass into the processor. Brian Grimmett / Kansas News Service" />
 <figcaption> Workers at Shining Star Hemp Co. load a bag of hemp biomass into the processor. Brian Grimmett / Kansas News Service</figcaption>
 </figure>By BRIAN GRIMMETT <a href="https://www.kmuw.org/post/kansas-farmers-find-only-thing-harder-growing-hemp-selling-it">Kansas News Service</a>PRATT, Kansas — This summer marks the third year that Kansans have grown hemp for industrial uses.Yet
 growing the less sexy cousin of the plant associated with getting high 
and some medicinal uses has proven riskier and more difficult than many 
farmers initially expected.Consequently, the number of licenses issued this year is less than half of what the state saw in 2020.“There
 were some misconceptions about the ease of marketability of it,” said 
Braden Hoch, the state’s industrial hemp program supervisor.The risk of any agricultural operation is compounded by an ever-changing set of <a href="https://agriculture.ks.gov/divisions-programs/plant-protect-weed-control/industrial-hemp" target="_blank">state and federal rules</a>. And now some hemp farmers and processors want more help from the government to reduce risk and encourage innovation.<a href="https://www.shiningstarhemp.com/" target="_blank">Shining Star Hemp Co.</a> is one of only 11 licensed hemp processors in the state.Outside
 of the industrial building near the Pratt municipal airport in 
south-central Kansas where Shining Star operates sits rows of 1,200 
pound bags full of industrial hemp stalks, grains and flowers.Inside,
 workers break open the bags and dump them onto a large conveyor belt 
leading to a cacophony of machinery shaking, blowing and sifting the 
biomass into its usable parts.The operation is one of the few successful outfits in the state.“It’s
 been a lot of work, a lot of phone calls developing relationships and 
finding synergies,” Jennifer Holmes, who works with Shining Star <a href="https://plainjanehempco.com/" target="_blank">to develop and market products</a> said. “But honestly, I can say at this point, we’re doing awesome for where we’re at.”Paul McGeary masterminded Shining Star’s system for converting the hemp harvest into something industry can use.“It’s about, probably, 30 years of beating your head against the wall, mostly,” he said.McGeary
 is a contractor for Shining Star. He’s worked in the agricultural 
processing world for most of his life and has applied what he learned 
over decades of sifting wheat and corn to develop this machine to sift 
hemp.He said the complexity of the process is part of what’s 
holding the industry back. It just doesn’t have the scale to supply 
manufacturers who would put the fiber to use.“We were walking 
into those meetings thinking that to have 30-to- 40,000 pounds on hand 
is something. But when you walk into industry and they want five train 
cars a day or a trainload a week, we just aren’t prepared for that,” he 
said. “And getting them to wait until we’re prepared, that’s the 
bottleneck of the whole thing.”Hemp has been hyped as something 
with a wide range of industrial uses. The stalk can be made into paper 
or biodegradable plastics. The seeds can be made into food. And the 
flowers can be pressed to extract oils.But so far, the only 
market the industry is pushing seems to be for its cannabinoid-rich, or 
CBD, oil. And there’s a flood of CBD already on the market.“We 
don’t have the best of luck selling full-spectrum oil,” Holmes said. 
“It’s just something that we all need to work through and do the right 
thing and move into the grain and fiber industry.”But that will take millions of dollars in investments in new equipment.Until
 that equipment can be designed, built or purchased, companies 
interested in making products from hemp fibers are out of luck. A 
company in Newton, Kansas, wants to <a href="https://humanplantsolutions.com/" target="_blank">make prosthetic limbs from hemp</a>. It imports its processed hemp from overseas.Holmes
 wants more government help to offset some of the risk for investing in 
converting the plant into something useful for industry.“A lot 
of people are scared to start because they don’t know if they’re going 
to fail, so they don’t ever get started,” she said.The Kansas Department of Agriculture says its hemp growing licenses dropped&nbsp; from 218 in 2020, to only 81 this year.And last year, of the almost 4,000 acres planted, only 761 were harvested for production.An eighth of that had to be burned by the state because it contained too much of the psychoactive chemical THC.“The
 past two years have really helped individuals get up to speed,” Hoch 
said. “But producers are really still determining the best way to grow 
hemp as a crop and if it’s feasible to include in their rotation.”He
 said growers and processors need to expand beyond CBD products, but 
with federal and state rules surrounding the crop in constant flux, 
finding the right investors that can spur that kind of innovation and 
development will remain challenging.Brian Grimmett reports 
on the environment, energy and natural resources for KMUW in Wichita and
 the Kansas News Service. You can follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/briangrimmett?lang=en">@briangrimmett</a> or email him at grimmett@kmuw.org.

Kan. farmers: The only thing harder than growing hemp? Selling it 

MILWAUKEE (AP) — A federal judge has halted a loan forgiveness program for farmers of color in response to a lawsuit alleging the program discriminates against white farmers.

U.S. District Judge William Griesbach in Milwaukee issued a temporary restraining order Thursday suspending the program for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2021/06/10/judge-suspends-biden-debt-relief-program-farmers-color/7646187002/">Milwaukee Journal Sentinel</a>&nbsp;reported.

The program pays up to 120% of direct or guaranteed farm loan balances for Black, American Indian, Hispanic, Asian American or Pacific Islander farmers. President Joe Biden's administration created the loan forgiveness program as part of its COVID-19 pandemic relief plan.

Minority farmers have maintained for decades that they have been unfairly denied farm loans and other government assistance. Federal agriculture officials in 1999 and 2010 settled lawsuits from Black farmers accusing the agency of discriminating against them.

Conservative law firm Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-lawsuits-business-31e568255f85fb7655d20319d8dc271d">filed suit in April</a>&nbsp;arguing white farmers aren’t eligible, amounting to a violation of their constitutional rights. The firm sued on behalf of 12 farmers from Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Dakota, Missouri, Iowa, Arkansas, Oregon and Kentucky.

MILWAUKEE (AP) — A federal judge has halted a loan forgiveness program for farmers of color in response to a lawsuit alleging the program discriminates against white farmers.U.S. District Judge William Griesbach in Milwaukee issued a temporary restraining order Thursday suspending the program for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2021/06/10/judge-suspends-biden-debt-relief-program-farmers-color/7646187002/">Milwaukee Journal Sentinel</a>&nbsp;reported.The program pays up to 120% of direct or guaranteed farm loan balances for Black, American Indian, Hispanic, Asian American or Pacific Islander farmers. President Joe Biden's administration created the loan forgiveness program as part of its COVID-19 pandemic relief plan.Minority farmers have maintained for decades that they have been unfairly denied farm loans and other government assistance. Federal agriculture officials in 1999 and 2010 settled lawsuits from Black farmers accusing the agency of discriminating against them.Conservative law firm Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-lawsuits-business-31e568255f85fb7655d20319d8dc271d">filed suit in April</a>&nbsp;arguing white farmers aren’t eligible, amounting to a violation of their constitutional rights. The firm sued on behalf of 12 farmers from Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Dakota, Missouri, Iowa, Arkansas, Oregon and Kentucky.

Judge pauses loan forgiveness program for farmers of color

Minority farmers who for decades have faced systemic discrimination will begin to receive debt relief beginning in this month under what Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack called one of the most significant pieces of civil rights legislation in decades.

In an op-ed piece published in USA Today, Vilsack also called the debt relief a “major civil rights victory,” saying it responds to systemic discrimination perpetrated against farmers and ranchers of color by the Agriculture Department.

“It is a historic move that will symbolize that USDA actually cares and that the Biden administration is doing whatever they can to mend fences and show the minority farmers that they do care about them during his administration,” said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-race-and-ethnicity-tom-vilsack-agriculture-barack-obama-669c46ed87d24d3d14692c4b89eb04de">Abraham Carpenter</a>, a 59-year-old Black farmer whose family grows fruits and vegetables on about 1,500 acres near Grady, Arkansas.

Carpenter expects the debt relief will pay off about $200,000 in farm loans, freeing up money that can now be put toward farm operations like buying seed and equipment instead of making loan payments.

“I know they have said it about a thousand times that they wanted to bring everybody together to make sure everybody was treated fairly. You can say it a million times., but until you show it nobody really believes it,” he said. “But this action of paying off debts for the minority farmers shows they actually do care about treating everybody fairly.”

The U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency has published the first notice of funding availability under the American Rescue Plan Act for borrowers with qualifying direct farm loans. A subsequent notice for farmers with government-guaranteed agricultural loans held by private lenders will be published within 120 days.

A provision in the pandemic relief law directs USDA to pay off the farm loans of nearly 16,000 minority farmers and begin to address racial equity challenges. It authorizes the Agriculture Department to pay up to 120% of direct and guaranteed loan outstanding balances for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.

“I’m feeling really good,” said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-discrimination-kansas-cultures-agriculture-871f463bcf1e1e4fac8aa3492f7c8264">Rod Bradshaw</a>, a 68-year-old Black farmer who raises wheat, cattle and milo on 2,000 acres near Jetmore, Kansas. “We knew it was coming, we didn’t know when.”

Bradshaw, who has been farming since buying his first ground in 1976, has made several discrimination complaints with Agriculture Department over the years. He said he has four direct loans totaling more than $300,000 with USDA that he anticipates will be paid off under the debt relief plan.

“It’s going to free us up and let us halfway conduct business as usual,” Bradshaw said upon learning of Friday’s announcement. “This has been going on for so long, this is the first step of getting Black farmers and farmers of color back to where they need to be.”

The Agriculture Department said in its news release that for much of its history, socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers have faced discrimination, sometimes overt and sometimes through deeply embedded rules and policies.

“USDA is recommitting itself to gaining the trust and confidence of America’s farmers and ranchers using a new set of tools provided in the American Rescue Plan to increase opportunity, advance equity and address systemic discrimination in USDA programs,” Vilsack said.

By ROXANA HEGEMAN, Associated PressMinority farmers who for decades have faced systemic discrimination will begin to receive debt relief beginning in this month under what Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack called one of the most significant pieces of civil rights legislation in decades.In an op-ed piece published in USA Today, Vilsack also called the debt relief a “major civil rights victory,” saying it responds to systemic discrimination perpetrated against farmers and ranchers of color by the Agriculture Department.“It is a historic move that will symbolize that USDA actually cares and that the Biden administration is doing whatever they can to mend fences and show the minority farmers that they do care about them during his administration,” said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-race-and-ethnicity-tom-vilsack-agriculture-barack-obama-669c46ed87d24d3d14692c4b89eb04de">Abraham Carpenter</a>, a 59-year-old Black farmer whose family grows fruits and vegetables on about 1,500 acres near Grady, Arkansas.Carpenter expects the debt relief will pay off about $200,000 in farm loans, freeing up money that can now be put toward farm operations like buying seed and equipment instead of making loan payments.“I know they have said it about a thousand times that they wanted to bring everybody together to make sure everybody was treated fairly. You can say it a million times., but until you show it nobody really believes it,” he said. “But this action of paying off debts for the minority farmers shows they actually do care about treating everybody fairly.”The U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency has published the first notice of funding availability under the American Rescue Plan Act for borrowers with qualifying direct farm loans. A subsequent notice for farmers with government-guaranteed agricultural loans held by private lenders will be published within 120 days.A provision in the pandemic relief law directs USDA to pay off the farm loans of nearly 16,000 minority farmers and begin to address racial equity challenges. It authorizes the Agriculture Department to pay up to 120% of direct and guaranteed loan outstanding balances for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.“I’m feeling really good,” said&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-discrimination-kansas-cultures-agriculture-871f463bcf1e1e4fac8aa3492f7c8264">Rod Bradshaw</a>, a 68-year-old Black farmer who raises wheat, cattle and milo on 2,000 acres near Jetmore, Kansas. “We knew it was coming, we didn’t know when.”Bradshaw, who has been farming since buying his first ground in 1976, has made several discrimination complaints with Agriculture Department over the years. He said he has four direct loans totaling more than $300,000 with USDA that he anticipates will be paid off under the debt relief plan.“It’s going to free us up and let us halfway conduct business as usual,” Bradshaw said upon learning of Friday’s announcement. “This has been going on for so long, this is the first step of getting Black farmers and farmers of color back to where they need to be.”The Agriculture Department said in its news release that for much of its history, socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers have faced discrimination, sometimes overt and sometimes through deeply embedded rules and policies.“USDA is recommitting itself to gaining the trust and confidence of America’s farmers and ranchers using a new set of tools provided in the American Rescue Plan to increase opportunity, advance equity and address systemic discrimination in USDA programs,” Vilsack said.

USDA begins paying off loans of minority farmers 

WASHINGTON — U.S. wildlife managers are proposing federal protections for the lesser prairie chicken. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Wednesday said it will consider public comments and scientific information over the coming months before making a final determination.

U.S. Senator Jerry Moran said,&nbsp;“The Biden administration's proposal to list the lesser prairie-chicken under the Endangered Species Act threatens to harm farmers, ranchers, energy producers and rural communities. Kansas and surrounding states invested millions of public and private dollars in conservation efforts in the habitat area, resulting in the bird’s population more than doubling. The decision to propose a listing despite voluntary conservation efforts that continue to successfully restore habitat area removes any incentive for similar locally-driven efforts to occur for other species. This proposal will result in less wildlife conservation in the future, not more.”

Once listed as a threatened species, the chicken’s habitat spans parts of five states — including a portion of the oil-rich Permian Basin. Environmentalists have been pushing to reinstate federal protections. Landowners and the oil and gas industry have been working on voluntary conservation programs. Still, federal officials say threats remain. They're proposing to list the northern population as threatened and those in eastern New Mexico and the southern Texas Panhandle as endangered.

WASHINGTON — U.S. wildlife managers are proposing federal protections for the lesser prairie chicken. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Wednesday said it will consider public comments and scientific information over the coming months before making a final determination.U.S. Senator Jerry Moran said,&nbsp;“The Biden administration's proposal to list the lesser prairie-chicken under the Endangered Species Act threatens to harm farmers, ranchers, energy producers and rural communities. Kansas and surrounding states invested millions of public and private dollars in conservation efforts in the habitat area, resulting in the bird’s population more than doubling. The decision to propose a listing despite voluntary conservation efforts that continue to successfully restore habitat area removes any incentive for similar locally-driven efforts to occur for other species. This proposal will result in less wildlife conservation in the future, not more.”Once listed as a threatened species, the chicken’s habitat spans parts of five states — including a portion of the oil-rich Permian Basin. Environmentalists have been pushing to reinstate federal protections. Landowners and the oil and gas industry have been working on voluntary conservation programs. Still, federal officials say threats remain. They're proposing to list the northern population as threatened and those in eastern New Mexico and the southern Texas Panhandle as endangered.

Moran: Lesser prairie chicken proposal will hurt farmers, ranchers

SALINA, Kan. (AP) — Authorities have rescued a man who fell into a grain storage facility near Salina and became trapped. Salina Fire Department Fire Marshal Troy Long said the man was apparently trying to remove a clog when he fell into a grain mover system at the Scoular grain elevator. 

The machinery was quickly shut down. Long said crews were able were able to remove part of that grain mover system and safely get the man out. He then was taken to a hospital with unknown injuries. Long said the department trains for situations like this often.

SALINE COUNTY —One person was rescued after an incident at the Scoular Grain elevator, 2880 East Country Club Road in Salina on Thursday, according to Sheriff's Lt. Jeremiah Hayes.

EMS transported the man to the hospital in Salina.&nbsp; Authorities released no additional details.&nbsp; 

Check the Post for more information as it becomes available.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/4/1617306805267.jpeg" alt="Emergency crews responded to Scoular Grain elevator east of Salina this afternoon.Salina Post photo" />
 <figcaption>Emergency crews responded to Scoular Grain elevator east of Salina this afternoon.Salina Post photo</figcaption>
 </figure>SALINA, Kan. (AP) — Authorities have rescued a man who fell into a grain storage facility near Salina and became trapped. Salina Fire Department Fire Marshal Troy Long said the man was apparently trying to remove a clog when he fell into a grain mover system at the Scoular grain elevator. The machinery was quickly shut down. Long said crews were able were able to remove part of that grain mover system and safely get the man out. He then was taken to a hospital with unknown injuries. Long said the department trains for situations like this often.------------SALINE COUNTY —One person was rescued after an incident at the Scoular Grain elevator, 2880 East Country Club Road in Salina on Thursday, according to Sheriff's Lt. Jeremiah Hayes.EMS transported the man to the hospital in Salina.&nbsp; Authorities released no additional details.&nbsp; Check the Post for more information as it becomes available.