How Climate-Friendly Fibers Lost Ground When Trump Took Over

Since launching in 2023, the Climate Beneficial Fiber Partnership has aimed to achieve exactly this: bringing together various parties to enhance the production of what’s known as “climate-smart cotton and wool. This initiative seeks to strengthen agricultural resilience, restore soil health, and broaden economic prospects for farmers across America.

This was not just a short-lived trial project. It was led by the National Center for Appropriate Technology along with its five collaborators—the Carbon Cycle Institute, the Colorado State University Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Fibershed , Seed2Shirt and New York Textile Lab - The initiative covered 135 farms and ranches totaling approximately 2.1 million acres spread throughout California, Georgia, Indiana, Montana, New York, North Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Wyoming.

If the aspirations were grand, then the support matched them. A substantial $30 million grant from the USDA’s Partnership for Climate-Smart Commodities offered participating farmers access to technical help along with reimbursement and incentives aimed at planning, validating, and executing comprehensive farm-wide strategies focused on lowering greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing carbon capture. This initiative planned to store approximately 3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide throughout the duration of the funding by decreasing reliance on synthetic fertilizers, augmenting soil organic content, and improving water retention capabilities. Additionally, it intended to develop new market opportunities, strengthen rural areas, and emphasize involvement with historically marginalized groups, notably African American households within the Southern regions.

That was essentially the core idea behind the initial five-year strategy. However, if the halt of previously allocated federal funding at the beginning of President Trump’s second term didn’t disrupt these plans after just two years, the recent termination of the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities initiative in mid-April certainly seems likely to do so. Although the USDA mentioned that certain initiatives might still be eligible for assessment provided they show evidence that “a substantial portion of the granted federal funds would reach farmers,” Rebecca Burgess, who serves as the executive director of Fibershed—a non-profit organization based in California dedicated to developing local fiber networks—remains pessimistic about this development.

"We met almost all of the new criteria set forth; however, our share for driving funds dropped from 65 percent to 62 percent compared to what was allocated to farmers,” she explained. “All parties now must resubmit their applications, involving considerable administrative work such as meetings, negotiations, and documentation preparation—tasks that were handled previously. Consequently, repeating these processes lacks efficiency. The previous round required us to invest around two-and-a-half years just to secure approval and get fully integrated into the program. This repetitive process offers no improvements in terms of effectiveness.”

The cancellation of the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities, which the USDA claims has been “overhauled” into the Advancing Markets for Producers program, came as little surprise. President Donald Trump had openly and frequently criticized the scientific consensus on climate change, labeling it a fraud or deception.

Since taking office, the White House has initiated a comprehensive attack on the global climate agreement by suspending governmental research efforts, laying off numerous workers, reversing environmental rules, and removing mentions of global warming from official sites. The president has filled his cabinet with individuals who echo his disdain for the former leadership and align strictly with partisan views. For instance, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins dismissed the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities as a "Biden-era climate slush fund.”

"Rollins stated in a release that the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities program was primarily designed to promote what he calls the 'green new deal' at the expense of non-governmental organizations rather than benefiting American farmers. He mentioned that under the Biden administration, farmer concerns were sidelined. As secretary, I've listened closely to our farmers who report that numerous USDA collaborations are laden with bureaucratic hurdles, lack clear objectives, and necessitate intricate documentation processes which often marginalize farmers,” he explained. “We're addressing these issues and refocusing our initiatives to empower our farmers for an unparalleled period of success.”

If there’s one thing the administration aims to take apart even more than others, it’s any initiative with traces of “wokeness” via the encouragement of D.E.I.—diversity, equity, and inclusion. Terms like “Black,” “BIPOC,” and “marginalized” were specifically instructed by the Trump administration to be avoided in grant proposals and contracts. However, these terms form the core principles of the Climate Beneficial Fiber Partnership, an effort designed to allocate at least 40% of its benefits to farmers historically marginalized from such programs.

The proportion of resources allocated to Black farmers throughout the U.S. is shockingly small," stated Tameka Peoples, the founder of Seed2Shirt, which stands as the nation’s premier Black-female-founded fully vertical apparel production and print-on-demand firm. "Every year, we’re witnessing the loss of vast tracts of farmland amounting to hundreds of thousands of acres. This trend runs contrary to social equity; it amounts to discrimination. Therefore, we must rise up and advocate for those farmers who have long been marginalized and essentially excluded from broader environmental discussions.

So far, the damage caused by missing funds has spread outward, eroding the financial stability that businesses and farms depend on for future planning. People noted that this funding shortfall has not just impacted farmers' incomes—some of whom have grown cotton for over five generations and took risks to adopt sustainable methods—but it also poses an existential threat to her ten-member crew.

As a CEO, you might think, 'Alright, I’ll put aside my needs temporarily and see how long we can sustain operations with our current reserves,' she explained. 'Ultimately though, we aim to have payment conditions evaluated and respected.'

The hiatus in funding before the program’s termination posed risks as all were anticipated to continue their work unpaid, according to Laura Sansone, founder of New York Textile Lab. This initiative promotes sustainable agriculture via a wool buying collective known as the Carbon Farming Network within New York State. During this period of uncertain finances, she opted out of receiving payment herself and even used her own funds to cover expenses for her carbon farm consultant.

According to Sansone, the fact that the farms associated with the New York Textile Lab will retain their animals, which continue to produce fibers, is clear. However, whether the lab can still offer sufficient technical support and financial assistance to address the challenges posed by continuous resource depletion remains uncertain.

“I fail to see how we can actually proceed with that; it’s extremely challenging without the necessary funds,” remarked Sansone, who moonlights as a textile designer. “We’re attempting to develop backup strategies for raising capital, yet this adds an immense amount of additional effort. On top of maintaining operations, I’ll now have to shift focus and seek out funding. This is tough, but everyone involved in the program risks losing staff members.”

She mentioned that the farmers would be the ones suffering the greatest losses. Besides enhancing climate resilience, the Climate Beneficial Fiber Partnership aimed at establishing strong connections within local communities and ensuring clear responsibility towards the land, the residents, and the livestock.

Losing the momentum

Benjamin Wood, who owns a 140-acre farm near Waterville, N.Y., thinks about King Canute’s tale when he hears how the government views climate change. The farm cultivates sheep and vegetables. Just as King Canute couldn’t stop the tides from rising despite his orders, ignoring scientific facts about climate change is both pointless and unwise.

“I see a clear connection between issues like avian influenza and egg prices with climate change,” he stated. “In my view, this relationship is straightforward. People should realize that our beef cattle population has decreased by 20 percent due to severe droughts in the Western region two years back, which forced many farmers to sell their livestock; those reductions have not yet been replenished. As such, all these factors will influence both our agricultural output and the cost of groceries for typical consumers.”

Wood mentioned that the additional funds from the Climate Beneficial Fiber Partnership enabled him to cover expenses like installing new water lines, resowing pastures, and planting trees, which his usual earnings wouldn’t have covered. While he’ll continue with these activities, their implementation will proceed at a more gradual pace.

What's arguably worse for farmers are the whipsawing conditions driven by Trump's brewing trade war. If there's another blow they can't take at a time of rising input costs and falling commodity prices, Wood said, it's the tariffs that are already stoking price increases and retaliatory measures from America's trading partners.

"Many individuals aren’t aware that Canada provides us with potash—a crucial element for growing various crops—and they’ve imposed tariffs first at 25%, then reduced to 10%. This increase in price will likely lead to decreased production,” he stated. “Additionally, there’s a 25% tariff on steel. It’ll boost the expense of agricultural equipment, making it even more unaffordable for many farmers. Consequently, these factors have numerous consequences that the average individual remains unaware of.”

During President Trump’s initial term, retaliatory trade measures almost devastated many farmers. They were spared total collapse thanks to a $23 billion financial aid package from the government. Last month, similar to recognizing past events, the USDA declared they would distribute up to $10 billion via the Emergency Commodities Support Initiative aimed at supporting agribusinesses for the 2024 harvest season. Nonetheless, Burgess believes this assistance merely offers temporary relief rather than a long-lasting solution.

“He’s offering $84 per acre to cotton farmers as a single payout,” she mentioned regarding Trump. “Our arrangement involved a five-year catalytic grant instead. This wasn’t welfare; it aimed at establishing markets where climate-resistant farming became standard practice via specific pricing mechanisms and verifications. However, this initiative posed a challenge to his administration since it fostered alliances among those who were either marginalized or perceived themselves as such, potentially leading to minor but significant shifts in power dynamics.”

What irritates Burgess despite the advancements being made—"you had Black farmers beginning to build trust, along with more conservative and libertarian ranchers and farmers considering that climate-beneficial practices might not be such a bad idea"—is that the Climate Beneficial Fiber Partnership was envisioned as a crucial step toward rebuilding the nation’s devastated infrastructure for handling fibers and textiles via the establishment of what she refers to as "local supply chains." Burgess highlighted examples like microfactories which could play this role. Unspun which does not originate from China or Mexico but rather from the Bay Area.

“I’m genuinely enthusiastic about integrating some of these highly advanced, late-stage value chain technologies such as Unspun with the resources they require,” she stated. “Currently, we aren’t able to supply the necessary materials for their processes directly from our farms, which are located just ninety minutes away from their tech hub. That’s why I remain hopeful about achieving this integration.”

Heidi Barr understands this sentiment well. Over the last half-decade, as the co-founder and CEO of the PA Flax Project, she has dedicated herself to rejuvenating the flax-to-linen sector in Pennsylvania.

This would entail more than just increasing the land dedicated to cultivating climate-beneficial plants, which demand minimal or zero chemical additives and water, and enhance soil quality via their extensive root systems’ aeration capabilities, as she mentioned. The final flax processing facility in the U.S. closed about six decades ago when it could not compete with less expensive imports from Europe and Asia. Rebuilding the necessary facilities to convert flax into linen presents a significantly greater challenge.

Most of the $1.7 million allocated for the PA Flax Project over three years originates from the USDA via the Organic Market Development Grant, although this grant remains uncertain. Just as they were preparing to start building the mill, the organization discovered that the government would not reimburse their costs anymore. As a result, they have let go of two employees and halted contract work with external consultants. Additionally, farmers cannot proceed with planting crops without assurance of support until harvest time.

Suspending this project at such a critical point seems inconsistent with the Trump administration’s “America First” strategy aimed at bringing back domestic manufacturing. By 2030, the facility has the potential to generate an annual income of $6 million, create 16 permanent positions for management and staff members, and offer chances for around 100 local farmers—possibly extending up to regions near Canada—to participate in related activities.

"It’s pretty much a slam dunk with only a small financial commitment,” Barr stated. “However, the harsh truth is that it won’t make a difference if this funding freeze persists and we fail to gather enough funds to cover the shortfall, as we would be forced to shut down our operations.” She added, “The loss of progress right now is incredibly damaging. Restarting wouldn’t be like turning on a tap to refill a glass; rebuilding will require considerable time.”

Securing alternate financing options may not be straightforward. Government grants can be considered, but often they are linked with extensive federal support. Additionally, turning to individual donors or charitable foundations is another route; however, competing for funds from these more limited resources could pose challenges. tougher than ever Recessionary environments do not encourage risk-taking. Therefore, it may fall upon clothing and home furnishings brands sourcing textiles to take initiative. As for retailers like J.Crew Everlane and Carhartt have begun sponsoring American farms as they shift towards growing climate-friendly cotton in targeted phases. According to Peoples, their current involvement has become more crucial than ever before.

“We simply require additional support—perhaps even forming a coalition of the willing at present,” she stated. “In both climate efforts and community initiatives, the effects resonate across generations. This involves transforming lifestyles and landscapes alike. Therefore, should we fail to continue with this crucial work, future generations could face significant planetary challenges.”

People prefer not to publicly criticize brands; that’s not her approach. However, she aims for these companies to understand that although small-scale farmers typically manage with minimal resources, the U.S. risks losing them entirely. Alongside this loss would be their conscientious care of the environment.

“I’m urging every company in this industry who desires to make a difference to say, 'Let’s collaborate and find solutions together,'” she stated. “Regardless, Seed2Shirt won’t wait. We simply cannot afford to. The science indicates that the situation is deteriorating further, and if we fail to act immediately, we have no idea what kind of world we’ll leave for future generations.”

More from Sourcing Journal

• Could Trump's Tariffs Benefit or Harm American Clothing Industry Workers?
• $2 Billion Worth of Home Textiles at Stake in India Due to Tariff Turmoil
• Why REI Withdrew Its Backing of Interior Secretary Doug Burgum