Farm to Plate presentation highlights food economy, land loss risk and conservation gains in Vermont

Farm to Plate Director Jake Claro told the Agriculture, Food Resiliency & Forestry committee that Vermont’s food and farming sector supports roughly 63,491 jobs — about 20.6% of total employment in the state — and that production and processing jobs alone account for about 9.2% of the state’s workforce.

The data provides a baseline for policy or budget requests the committee may receive, Jake Claro said, and can help answer “why” certain investments are important for economic development and public policy.

Farm to Plate and other presenters told the committee that local food sales are dispersed across many market channels and that beverages (primarily beer) represented about 25% of local food sales in 2017; craft beverages accounted for roughly 17% of local food‑sales growth between 2014 and 2017. Presenters said that retail channels such as co‑ops and regional grocers (Hannaford, for example) are strategic places to grow market share for local producers, while national dollar stores are generally a lower priority for current outreach.

The briefing also covered land use and production capacity. Presenters cited analysis from American Farmland Trust that, under a business‑as‑usual scenario, Vermont could lose another 41,000 acres of farmland. Jake Claro said Vermont’s vegetable acreage is small relative to regional needs: while the New England target would move vegetable acreage from about 97,500 acres to 235,000 acres across six states to reach a 30% local‑sourcing goal, Vermont currently accounts for about 3,000 of the roughly 97,500 acres in the region; Farm to Plate said Vermont’s vegetable sector reports about 30,000 acres historically in vegetable farms but only about 3,600 acres in year‑to‑year cropping.

Committee members raised land‑access barriers, including fragmentation, soil quality, elevation limits and drainage. Presenters noted multiple possible approaches, including shared ownership or leasing models and collaboration with groups such as the Intervale Center to structure cooperative land access.

On water quality and conservation, agency and Farm to Plate presenters said that since about 2016 roughly 493,000 acres of conservation practices have been implemented statewide and these practices are estimated to have reduced roughly 200,000 kilograms of phosphorus compared with the established baseline. Abby (Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets staff) described the growth of cover cropping as a case study: “we needed farmers to tell farmers about the practice being valuable for them,” she said, adding that farmer‑to‑farmer demonstration, data showing fuel and yield benefits, and cost‑share incentives were key to adoption. Presenters said about 34% of conservation practices now implemented statewide are cover cropping.

Presenters emphasized cost effectiveness: agricultural conservation investments yield phosphorus reductions at lower cost per kilogram than many other categories of interventions, the briefing showed. The panel also noted co‑benefits — carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat and soil health — from many of the same practices being funded for water quality.

On greenhouse gases, presenters said agriculture accounts for about 16% of Vermont’s estimated greenhouse‑gas emissions. Roughly half of that agricultural total is associated with livestock (enteric methane) and another substantial share originates in manure management. The briefing noted, however, that agricultural land also sequesters carbon; using maximum modeled values, presenters said conservation practices implemented for water quality have a sequestration effect “equivalent to taking almost 7,000 cars off the roads in Vermont.”

Food security was the final major topic. Presenters said USDA’s three‑year rolling estimates put Vermont’s food‑insecurity rate near 9.2% for 2023, and they warned that the rolling average likely understates current household hardship because it lags the most recent year. Jake Claro said SNAP benefits per participant increased substantially during the COVID period (a roughly 102% increase from earlier averages), and the committee was told that the single clearest predictor of household food insecurity is lack of money, while transportation, accessibility of retail outlets and other barriers also matter.

Committee members and staff flagged follow‑up actions but no formal votes were taken. Abby offered to provide additional Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets data and Jake Claro said he would look up a specific regional acreage calculation cited during the discussion.

The presentation ran through economic, environmental and food‑access data the committee may use to frame future policy or budget requests; presenters repeatedly emphasized that technical assistance, targeted incentives and market‑development strategies are needed to help producers scale and access larger retail channels.