Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
University of Maryland presents county agriculture study: tobacco collapse, stable farm counts and sea‑level concerns
Summary
A University of Maryland researcher presented agricultural census analysis showing steep declines in tobacco planting and sales since the buyout, roughly stable farm counts since 2002, a predominance of small farms (618 of 632 farms under $250,000 in sales), and a sea‑level rise map that could inundate low‑lying agricultural land by 2030.
Marie Howland of the University of Maryland presented a data‑driven review of St. Mary's County agriculture and told the Economic Development Commission advisory group that, while tobacco production has collapsed, broader agricultural measures show stability since the early 2000s — though localized land conversion and sea‑level rise are potential concerns.
Howland said tobacco acreage fell from roughly 3,000 acres before the buyout to about 173 acres by 2012, with production in pounds falling from approximately 5,000,000 to about 400,000 and tobacco sales declining from nearly $8 million to about $683,000. She noted that tobacco growers who remain in the market tend to be Amish and Mennonite operations.
Using census and planning data, Howland showed that the county's number of farms dipped around 2002 and then stabilized; average farm size has stayed near 100–106 acres. She cited 2012 census numbers of 632 farms, 618 of which reported sales under $250,000 — roughly 98% of farms by count. "I don't see anything really alarming," Howland said about the aggregate trends since 2002, while acknowledging that the county's agricultural character has changed since the tobacco era.
Some participants raised data‑consistency concerns. One participant cited Maryland Department of Agriculture figures showing 2012 average net cash farm income as negative $2,600 for the county; Howland and participants agreed to reconcile differing sources (USDA, BEA, Maryland Department of Agriculture) to resolve apparent discrepancies.
Howland compared 2002 and 2010 land‑use maps and reported net conversions out of agriculture as well as parcels that converted back into agricultural use; she noted net agricultural land change figures discussed at the meeting (e.g., an example net loss of roughly 8,700 acres when comparing certain rows on the presentation) and asked staff and committee members to help interpret where vacant land and non‑agricultural conversions are occurring.
The presentation included an inundation map from the National Center for Smart Growth showing areas that could be affected by a two‑foot sea‑level rise by 2030. Howland flagged that as an area for further study because coastal inundation or increased nuisance flooding could reduce available acreage for agriculture near shorelines and major roads.
Committee members discussed policy tools — transfer of development rights (TDR), preservation easements and state septic legislation (Senate Bill 253) — that affect land value and preservation outcomes. Panelists emphasized that preserving farmland typically requires economically viable farm operations: "The best way to preserve farmland is with a profitable farmer," one participant said.
Next steps: Howland said she would circulate the updated slides and source data, staff will compare differing income series and the team will pursue more robust seafood/aquaculture data. The SEDS consultant will schedule focus groups and individual meetings with advisory members in late November–December to gather industry feedback.
