LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Who should decide the future of family farms?
Dear Editor,
For generations, farmers have diversified to survive. They have planted timber, leased hunting rights, enrolled land in conservation programs, embraced new technology, and found new ways to generate income while preserving their land. Diversification has never meant abandoning agriculture. It has meant adapting to changing times so farms could remain in the family for another generation.
Today, some landowners are choosing renewable energy as one more way to diversify their income and strengthen the long-term future of their farms. Others will choose timber, traditional agriculture, livestock, conservation programs, agritourism, or different opportunities. There is no single right answer for every family. The point is not that every farmer should make the same decision. The point is that every farmer should remain free to make the decision they believe is best for their land, their family, and their future.
I understand that many of my neighbors sincerely oppose renewable energy projects. I respect their right to hold those views and to speak during the public process. Most are motivated by a genuine desire to protect the rural character of our community and preserve the farmland they love. We share that goal.
Where we differ is not in our love for this community but in how we believe that goal is best achieved. Protecting family farms also means trusting the families who own them to make thoughtful, lawful decisions about the future of their property. Every farm is different. Every family’s circumstances are different. What is right for one landowner may not be right for another, and that is exactly why those decisions should remain with the people who know their land best.
Every proposed project should receive careful review. County officials should evaluate environmental impacts, drainage, setbacks, buffering, road access, and compliance with local ordinances. Citizens should have opportunities to ask questions, express concerns, and participate in public hearings. Those protections exist for good reason, and they should be taken seriously.
But once a project has completed that process and satisfied the requirements established by local ordinances, those decisions should carry meaning. If the rules can be changed after applicants have followed the law simply because opposition continues, confidence in the process begins to erode. That uncertainty affects more than one project or one landowner. It affects every farmer, every property owner, and every business considering an investment in our community.
This conversation extends well beyond renewable energy. Tomorrow the controversy could involve timber management, poultry houses, conservation easements, manufacturing, agritourism, or another lawful use of private property. The principle should remain the same. Decisions should be guided by established laws, fair procedures, and respect for the rights and responsibilities of landowners.
There is another reality we should acknowledge.
Many people say they want to preserve family farms and protect the rural character of South Carolina. I share that goal wholeheartedly. But preserving farmland requires more than admiration. It requires economic sustainability.
We cannot ask farmers to resist selling their land for subdivisions and commercial development while opposing opportunities afforded to them to diversify their income. Those expectations do not always coexist. If we truly want to preserve family farms, we must also respect the freedom of farm families to make lawful business decisions that help keep their land intact and in family ownership.
For generations, we have trusted farmers with tremendous responsibility. We trust them to care for the land, conserve natural resources, produce our food and fiber, and leave their farms better than they found them. That trust should not end when they make difficult decisions about their family’s future.
If we truly believe family farms are worth preserving, then we must also trust the families who own them to decide how best to preserve them.
In the end, this discussion is not really about renewable energy.
It is about trust. It is about stewardship. It is about responsibility.
And it is about preserving the freedom that allows the families who have devoted their lives to caring for the land—not the rest of us—to decide its future.
Carol Ross,
Retired Darlington educator,
wife of retired SC farmer,
Darlington, SC