Wisconsin Dairy Farmer Warns About ESG Climate Change Regulations – Impact on Small Farms

A Wisconsin dairy farmer has gone viral after sharing her story regarding new Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics implemented by corporate giants like Nestlé that are adding extra work for small dairy farmers who are already stretched for time and resources. The farmer said the letter she received states that providing the information is voluntary, but she explains that she will not be able to sell her milk without complying with the “voluntary” stipulations.

The letter states that this is not another requirement, but rather an “industry-led effort to recognize and measure the sustainable practices” the farmers are “already doing every day.”

“They need to know herd data, nutrition data, energy data, in terms of total terms of natural gas, total gallons of diesel,” the farmer explained. “Now mind you, this is for a whole year. Total gallons of propane, total gallons of biodiesel, and total kilowatts of electricity for 12 months.”

Animal-based agriculture has been a primary target of climate change initiatives to reduce human-caused greenhouse gas emissions, and the dairy industry has launched “Dairy Net Zero,” aiming to reduce the industry’s GHG emissions to zero by 2050. These goals have received criticisms for how they disproportionately impact small farmers, which causes more consolidation amongst the large corporate entities that control the majority of the food supply.

The Dairy Net Zero initiative is supported by big companies like Nestle and Starbucks alongside dairy industry groups and the USDA. Elanco, a former subsidiary of Eli Lilly and the producer of livestock vaccines, is also a supporter of the initiative.

In October, Nestlé announced it was leaving the Dairy Methane Action Alliance, but it doesn’t seem to have impacted the company’s support of net-zero emission goals. In addition to supporting the net-zero goal, it created a roadmap in 2020 that calls for halving GHG emissions by 2030.

Last month, several agricultural groups petitioned the USDA to request modifications to the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP). Specifically, the groups argued that the program should stop approving grants for digesters, which are only financially viable for large, industrial farms. Digesters can turn methane emissions into fuel as part of an initiative to combat climate change. Small farms don’t have enough waste to justify the high cost.

A manure digester costs between $2 and $12 million and receives an average grant amount of $855,701 from the REAP program. Grants for solar panels in the program average $131,480, a piece of technology that can be utilized by farms of all sizes. The average wind project grant was $95,202. The petition letter argues that large grant amounts sent to industrial farms further undermine small farms and lead to more consolidation within the industry.

The Trump administration announced that it is halting grant applications for digesters through the REAP program. Last August, Secretary Brooke Rollins announced that solar and wind projects would no longer be approved for productive “prime” farmland.

“Our prime farmland should not be wasted and replaced with green new deal subsidized solar panels,” Secretary Rollins said in August. “It has been disheartening to see our beautiful farmland displaced by solar projects, especially in rural areas that have strong agricultural heritage. One of the largest barriers of entry for new and young farmers is access to land. Subsidized solar farms have made it more difficult for farmers to access farmland by making it more expensive and less available. We are no longer allowing businesses to use your taxpayer dollars to fund solar projects on prime American farmland, and we will no longer allow solar panels manufactured by foreign adversaries to be used in our USDA-funded projects.”

The HighWire has reported about the flawed United Nations study from two decades ago that started labeling animal-based agriculture as a uniquely high emitter of greenhouse gases compared to transportation. Rising costs for feed, fertilizer, seeds, and tools also disproportionately hinder small farmers. The number of farm bankruptcies in 2025 increased from the prior year. The HighWire has also reported about the Farm Credit scandal that keeps small farmers indebted to a system that supports the corporate conglomerates like Tyson Foods.

The Trump administration has received criticism for the tariffs it has implemented and the impact that they have on the agricultural sector. In December, the USDA announced $12 billion in assistance to farmers during the current market disruptions. There has been a beef shortage, and the administration has moved to increase imports from Argentina to help keep costs low for American consumers.

The initiatives to combat climate change disproportionately impact small farmers who can’t afford to keep up with the extra costs associated with more regulations. This has been a sticking point for European farmers as well, sparking protests throughout the continent in France, Poland, Germany, and Belgium, among others.

The Trump administration has promised to unleash American energy by reducing regulatory hurdles that are financially burdensome to American industries, including agriculture. The EPA has now announced that the Clean Air Act will not be used as a basis to prevent farmers from repairing their own farm equipment, which will allow small farms to save money on repair costs.

“EPA is proud to set the record straight and protect farmers. For far too long, manufacturers have wrongly used the Clean Air Act to monopolize the repair markets, hurting our farmers,” said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. “Common sense is following the law as it is written, and that is what the Trump EPA is committed to doing. By protecting every American’s right to repair, we’re not just fixing devices, we’re securing a stronger, more independent future for our country.”