New Bill Funds Farmer-to-Farmer Networks, Paying Peers to Teach Conservation

The Farmer to Farmer Education Act of 2025 is aiming to change how agricultural technical assistance works by putting the knowledge-sharing power directly into the hands of farmers. Essentially, this bill amends the Food Security Act of 1985 to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to fund "farmer-to-farmer networks." Think of these networks as formalized peer-support groups where experienced farmers, ranchers, and forest owners can mentor others on adopting science-based, site-specific conservation methods. This is less about a government expert telling you what to do, and more about learning from the neighbor who actually made it work on their own land.

The Peer-to-Peer Policy Shift

The core of this legislation is the recognition that the best advice often comes from someone who has been there. The bill authorizes cooperative agreements with non-profits, universities, Tribes, and even the farmer networks themselves to build capacity for this peer learning. These groups will be responsible for things like matching mentors with mentees, coordinating group learning sessions, and generally making it easier for farmers to share knowledge. A critical detail is the prioritization: the Secretary must prioritize groups serving historically underserved farmers, including those with limited resources or working in high-poverty areas, ensuring the technical help is tailored and accessible. If language is a barrier, the groups must also make a good faith effort to provide assistance in the farmer’s native language.

Getting Paid for Your Expertise

For the busy farmer, rancher, or forest owner, time is money. This bill addresses that directly through its subaward mechanism. The main organizations receiving the funding can issue subawards to other entities, including individuals, to carry out network activities. Crucially, these subaward funds can be used to pay participants—including the farmers doing the teaching or even those attending the educational events—at "normal market rates." This is a significant change, transforming technical assistance from a purely voluntary effort into a compensated exchange of knowledge, recognizing that sharing expertise is valuable work.

The NRCS Budget Question

While the peer-to-peer approach is smart and practical, the funding mechanism introduces a potential wrinkle. The bill states that the Secretary will use "whatever money is necessary" from the annual budget set aside for the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) conservation operations to fund this new program. For taxpayers and those invested in existing conservation efforts, this is the part that raises an eyebrow. Unlike a specific appropriation with a dollar limit, this language gives the Secretary the flexibility to draw an unspecified amount from the NRCS’s existing operational budget. While the goals are good—to promote conservation and support underserved farmers—it means that the money for this new initiative will be pulled directly from the same pot used for established NRCS programs, potentially straining those resources if the new networks become very successful and require substantial funding. The Secretary is required to report back to Congress within four years on how the money was spent and the conservation results achieved, which should provide the first hard look at the program's actual cost and effectiveness.