R

u

ral COOPERATIVES COOPERATIVES

USDA / Rural Development November/December 2007

Wind Power

Windfall for Rural America? Windfall for Rural America?

Wind Power Wind Power

Page 4

Special Wind

Power Section 
Editor’s Note: This guest commentary is written by Glenn English,

CEO of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association.

This summer, Sunflower Electric Power Corporation, a

generation and transmission cooperative, embarked on a

remarkable bio-energy project to create an energy production

system that combines an array of subsystems, including an

algae reactor, an anaerobic digester, a biodiesel plant, a coalfired power plant, a dairy farm and an ethanol plant. Located

in Hays, Kan., this innovative center points to the central role

our nation’s agricultural sector can — and should — play in

researching, developing and deploying renewable energy. 

Rural electric co-ops are uniquely positioned to help

develop renewable resources. While states and cities have

been passing renewable energy requirements, those requirements can only be met using energy produced in rural areas,

such as wind, biomass, manure and large-scale solar power. 

Recently, the National Rural Electric Cooperative

Association (NRECA) committed to a roadmap for increasing

the development of domestic renewable energy options: the

25x25 Action Plan. This plan charts a course to meet an

ambitious goal: using renewable energy to meet 25 percent of

the nation’s total energy needs by the year 2025. 

Like Sunflower, cooperatives across the country are already

pursuing a wide variety of renewable energy projects. Basin

Electric Power Cooperative in Bismarck, N.D., has taken

advantage of rich wind resources in that state, adding

approximately 136 megawatts (MW) of wind energy to its

portfolio over the past several years through joint projects and

power purchase agreements. North Dakota is home to 96

MW of that wind power, with plans under development to

construct a 100 MW wind farm. In Missouri, Associated

Electric Cooperative developed the state’s first wind farm. 

Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs), which allow

cooperatives to finance renewable energy projects, have

opened the floodgates for renewable energy development.

Electric cooperatives submitted 85 applications to the

Treasury Department for a total of $554 million in bond

authority. According to the Internal Revenue Service, 78

cooperative projects in 22 states received bond allocations. 

East Kentucky Power Cooperative was the state’s first

power plant to bring landfill gas power online and is the only

Kentucky utility generating renewable energy. The co-op

owns and operates five landfill gas plants and received a

$20 million CREB for landfill gas development. 

The CREB program also opened the door for distribution

cooperatives to participate in renewable energy development.

Distribution co-ops in California, Minnesota, Illinois and

Indiana are using CREBs to develop small-scale wind projects.

Distribution co-ops in Arizona, New Mexico and Hawaii are

developing solar projects using CREBs. 

Exploiting the nation’s wealth of renewable resources

requires more than money, however. Meeting the voluntary

goals of the 25x25 Action Plan requires political will and

public support. Increasingly, wind energy projects are being

held back by strong local opposition, in addition to inadequate

transmission capacity. Rural electric cooperatives, because

they are closely tied to their communities, can play a key role

in overcoming such obstacles through education and

promotion of renewable energy. Delta-Montrose Electric

Cooperative in Montrose, Colo., for example, webcasts

renewable energy conferences and sponsors expos.

Cooperatives are actively partnering with schools. In Ohio,

Logan County Electric Cooperative installed a residentialsized 10 kilowatt (kW) demonstration windmill on the

grounds of Indian Lake Schools, and Butler Rural Electric

Cooperative, in conjunction with Buckeye Power Inc. and

Miami University, erected a 230-square-foot photo-voltaic

panel that provides approximately 200 kW hours per month.

Both projects are providing real-time information and data to

members and the public at the Buckeye Power Web site.

Sulphur Springs Valley Electric Co-op in Wilcox, Ariz., will

use its CREB to build photo-voltaic shade structures at the 45

public schools and two colleges. 

Today, 11 percent of the power distributed by America’s

electric cooperatives is generated from renewable resources,

more than 40 billion kilowatt hours. As co-ops look for more

cost-effective renewable resources to provide Americans with

reliable, affordable energy, that total will continue to grow. 

Developing renewable energy will strengthen America and

increase our economic security by reducing our dependence

on foreign resources. As we build for the future we will

continue to increase our investment in renewable

technologies, bringing homegrown, regionally produced

energy safely and reliably to co-op members at the lowest

possible price. ■

COMMENTARY

Co-ops Fueling Green Revolution

2 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 3

Rural COOPERATIVES (1088-8845) is published

bimonthly by Rural Business–Cooperative Service,

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence

Ave. SW, Stop 0705, Washington, DC. 20250-0705.

The Secretary of Agriculture has determined that

publication of this periodical is necessary in the

transaction of public business required by law of 

the Department. Periodicals postage paid at

Washington, DC. and additional mailing offices.

Copies may be obtained from the Superintendent of

Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington,

DC, 20402, at $23 per year. Postmaster: send address

change to: Rural Cooperatives, USDA/RBS, Stop

3255, Wash., DC 20250-3255.

Mention in Rural COOPERATIVES of company and

brand names does not signify endorsement over

other companies’ products and services.

Unless otherwise stated, contents of this publication

are not copyrighted and may be reprinted freely. For

noncopyrighted articles, mention of source will be

appreciated but is not required.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits

discrimination in all its programs and activities on

the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial

status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation,

genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or

because all or part of an individual’s income is

derived from any public assistance program. (Not 

all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons

with disabilities who require alternative means for

communication of program information (Braille,

large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s

TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). 

To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA,

Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence

Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call

(800) 795-3272 (voice), or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA

is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Chuck Connor, Acting Secretary of Agriculture

Thomas C. Dorr, Under Secretary,

USDA Rural Development

Dan Campbell, Editor

Vision Integrated Marketing/KOTA, Design

Have a cooperative-related question?

Call (202) 720-6483, or

Fax (202) 720-4641

This publication was printed with vegetable oil-based ink.

R

u

ral COOPERATIVES COOPERATIVES

November/December 2007 Volume 74 Number 6

p. 4

p. 10

p. 20

p. 28

On the Cover:

Minwind Energy’s turbines are owned and operated by local

producers and community members in southern Minnesota. While

producer ownership of wind power still represents a fairly small

portion of the sector, interest in this business model is growing.

USDA photo by Dan Campbell 

FEATURES 

4 Harvesting the Wind 

Minnesota farmers structure business to keep more dollars at home

By Dan Campbell

9 Iowa wind farm supported by USDA renewable energy program

10 Wind Power Energizing Rural America

Increasing share of U.S. wind energy sector held by community and producer groups 

By Alan Borst

14 Predevelopment work nets higher royalties for landowners

By Dan Campbell

17 Renewable x 2 

Corn Plus taps wind power to operate ethanol plant

20 Stepping Up to the Plate

Basin Electric sees wind power as key part of multi-pronged strategy 

By Stephen Thompson

26 Spreading Seeds of Success

Alabama Farmers Co-op and its Bonnie Plant Farm strengthen rural South 

28 Small Advantages

Are small co-ops still viable in Ireland’s dairy pastures? 

By Robert Briscoe and Michael Ward

DEP A R TMENTS

2 COMMENTARY

23 UTILITY CO-OP CONNECTION

25 CO-OP DEVELOPMENT ACTION

34 VALUE-ADDED CORNER 

35 NEWSLINE

40 PAGE FROM THE PAST

42 ANNUAL ARTICLE INDEX

Wind P

o

wer Special
4 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

By Dan Campbell, editor

dan.campbell@wdc.usda.gov

urrounded by fields of corn swaying in an

early autumn breeze, Mark Willers makes his

way to a wind turbine soaring more than 240

feet into the blue Minnesota sky. After

pointing out to a visitor the surprisingly

small “footprint” of the turbine — corn grows to within a few

yards all around the tower — he unlocks the access door in

the base and examines the computer that is both the brain

and nerve center of the turbine. 

On the outside, the turbine looks deceptively simple: a

mammoth, three-bladed fan twirling on the end of a sleek,

cream-colored tower. But modern wind mills such as this are

works of technological genius — a 21st Century harness for

one of the oldest forms of power known to mankind. The

result is the generation of wind energy at levels unimagined

even a decade or two ago. This two-megawatt turbine, as tall

as a 30-story building, can produce 6 million kilowatts of

electricity annually, enough to light up 600 homes. 

But it is not a simple process. The computer constantly

adjusts the tilt of the blades, based on fluctuations in the

wind currents.

This turbine is one of 11 that comprise the Minwind

Energy wind farm near Luverne, in the southwest corner of

Minnesota. The turbines, built between 2002 and 2004, look

no different than most of the modern turbines that now

produce more than 11,600 megawatts (MW) of electricity in

the United States (74,200 MW worldwide) each year. 

But this wind farm is unusual in one very critical aspect: it

is owned and operated by about 300 area farmers and other

community members. Most other wind farms in the United

States are owned by private power companies. Willers and his

fellow members in Minwind — an LLC that operates on

cooperative principles — feel that this absentee ownership

pattern represents a lost opportunity for rural America. 

Owning the wind

When farmers and other rural landowners sell wind power

rights to their land for only land lease payments, “it’s a little

like colonialism in reverse,” says Willers, a fourth-generation

Minnesota grain farmer. His great grandfather in Germany

made his living in the late 1800s exporting German and

Russian wheat to the United States at a time when it was still

wheat deficient. 

The real money to be made from wind power comes not

from land rental, but from the generation of electrical power,

says Willers, who is also CEO of Minwind.

With southwest Minnesota being such a high-wind area,

and the nation hungry to develop renewable energy, there is

little doubt that wind power is going to continue to grow

here and in other windy regions of the United States –

primarily the Upper Midwest, Eastern Slope of the Rocky

Mountains and Great Plains states. 

“These wind projects are going to get done — either by

big corporations or by producer and community groups,”

says Tom Arends, a Minwind member and a semi-retired

grain and hog farmer. But there is no doubt where his heart

is. “With community ownership, it is going to keep more

money circulating locally and create more jobs. It’s easy to

lease land to a power company, but how many in your

community will really benefit from that? Very few.” 

A new vision for wind power in rural America is needed.

“We must find ways to keep more of these wind-energy

dollars within our state and within the Midwest — and we

need to collaborate to make it happen,” says Willers.

S

Harvesting the 

Minnesota farmers structure wind business to keep

more energy dollars close to home

When rural landowners sell wind power rights for only lease

payments, “it’s a little like colonialism in reverse,” says Mark

Willers, a fourth-generation Minnesota grain farmer and CEO of

Minwind. USDA photos by Dan Campbell
Prairie Wind

Wind Power
6 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

New spin on wind

Farmer and community ownership of wind power is a new

spin on the rapidly evolving renewable energy scene. One

does not need an advanced degree in economics to see why

local ownership matters. 

For starters, landowners must understand what percent of

gross wind power revenue

they are getting for leased

land. Most wind lease

payments are running 0.5 to

1.5 percent of gross value,

says Willers. “Farm land is

certainly not being rented

for one-half percent of the

gross.” Nor do the iron ore

or timber industries lease

land for such a minimal fee,

he observes. 

“Our goal has always

been to invest in businesses

that support a growing

community, and that means

we need to have the land

lease revenue, the gross power production revenue and the

tax revenue all stay in our local community,” Willers says. 

“If someone is going to be making money off my land, it

should be me — not some power company, and especially not

an Australian or Spanish company,” adds Arends, who is

concerned about growing levels of foreign ownership of U.S.

wind rights. 

Local governments and schools in Minnesota benefit from

wind power via a production tax leveled per kilowatt of

power generated. It is copied after a Danish model, so that

bigger turbines pay more. For each 100 MW of wind power

generated in Minnesota, about $1 million in tax revenue is

paid to local governments and schools, according to

Windustry, a nonprofit organization that provides technical

support for rural landowners and communities pursuing wind

energy projects.

Wind power is certainly not a “get-rich-quick” technology,

and farmers thinking they might reap fast “windfall profits”

should think again, Arends advises. “A lot of people really hit

it big for a few years with ethanol, but this is quite different.

The goal with wind is a slow, steady stream of income.” 

By the same token, since wind operates on long-term

power purchase agreements with set prices, the industry

should not be subject to the rapid market plunges that the

fuel industry experiences. 

Launching Minwind

Minwind was formed in 1999, but its roots go back to the

1970s, “When Midwest agriculture became a mature

industry,” says Willers. “If we didn’t export our grain or

livestock products, we didn’t have much of a market for it. So

we started looking at new ways to add value.” 

Most of the initial investors in Minwind also invested

many years earlier in Luverne’s ethanol plant (Agri-Energy

LLC) and other value-added businesses, including soybean

crushing and biodiesel plants. With the formation in 1999 of

the five-member Minwind

board of directors — all of

whom shared a deep-seated,

value-added business

philosophy — the co-op

began to pursue a feasibility

study. 

A letter was sent out to

potential local backers,

asking them to invest $500

each for a feasibility study.

That’s all it took to get 66

farmers and other

community members to

send in checks. That money

was used to hire a

consultant and launch the

study. By 2001, the board had decided to move forward with

the project, and shares were offered at $5,000 each to erect

four, one-megawatt wind turbines. Total cost was just under

$4 million. 

The original 66 members bought all the shares. A limit

was established so that one member could not own more

than 20 percent of the shares. As with a new-generation coop, members can sell their shares, but to date no one has sold

any.

There was virtually no opposition to the Minwind project.

“That is the beauty of a community project. When neighbors

all own part of it and will get a return from it, it really makes

a difference,” says Willers. 

Minwind began negotiating a power contract in 2001, and

the first four turbines were up and operating in 2002. The

co-op was able to take advantage of several Minnesota

programs that provide financial incentives to develop wind

power. 

When it was decided to expand the wind farm in 2004

with an additional seven, two-megawatt turbines, Minwind

looked to USDA Rural Development’s 9006 Renewable

Energy Program for help. Willers wrote the grant

applications, which netted the co-op $178,000 toward the

cost of each of those turbines.

Membership was expanded by 240, “but it was still pretty

much local, and all in-state,” says Willers. Indeed, the

company charter requires that investors be Minnesota

residents. Minwind raised several million dollars toward the

total cost of $12.5 million, financing the balance locally. 

“We never traveled more than two and a half miles to

A modern rural hospital in Luverne, Minn., is just one sign of the

strong local economy, which is bolstered by renewable energy and

other value-added businesses.
borrow money,” Willers says. “Our goal is to support as

many local jobs as possible, and that means using local

concrete people, local electricians, local banks and others.” 

Turbine placement

In choosing the site for a

wind farm, not only is a

thorough study of an area’s wind resources crucial, but so too

is proximity to transmission lines. Since farmers with the

turbines earn extra fees if they own the land the turbines are

sited on, there were some “internal politics” to be dealt with. 

“Some farmers will say, ‘My farm is on the highest

elevation in my township, and it was real windy last week, so

this is where the tower should go.’ But it’s a little more

complicated than that,” says Willers. Having a neutral

engineering consultant make the decision where to site the

wind farm helps avoid any appearance of favoritism.

“I don’t have any turbines on my land — not even any

close,” says Arends. But as a member of Minwind, he says he

benefits no matter where the towers are located, and thus he

supports placing them wherever they will generate the most

consistent energy. 

Negotiating a power purchase contract is definitely a job

for an attorney who specializes in such matters, they advise.

“The utility is naturally going to try to buy power from you

as cheaply as it can,” Willers says. Minwind negotiated with a

couple of possible buyers, ultimately opting to sell power to

both Alliant Energy and Xcel Energy. 

Transmission, tax credit concerns

Lack of transmission infrastructure is by far the biggest

overall limiting factor for wind power development in the

United States. “Our wind resources are mostly in the eastern

Rockies and northern plains, but most of our people are on

the two coasts,” Willers says. “If you are going to transport

all that electricity to the places it is needed, there needs to be

substantial expansion in our transmission system.” 

The biggest obstacle to promoting more local ownership

of wind power is the way the federal production tax credit

(PTC) law is written, he says. 

The value of these tax credits can be huge. Over a 10-year

period, they may even be equal to the lion’s share of the

initial cost of a turbine, says Arends. But the tax credits must

be used as an offset to passive income — the kind of income

big power companies have in plenty, but not small businesses

like Minwind or its members.

Minwind financed its wind farm without reliance on

PTCs, which instead flow back to the individual

shareholders. But some of them are unable to use the PTCs. 

“Why do we have legislation that prevents individuals

from being able to use production tax credits?” asks Arends. 

Willers sees the situation in even starker terms: “The

production tax credit law is very anti-agriculture. It moves

revenue out of the Midwest to the coasts, and even offshore. I

have a real problem with a tax system that promotes removal

or revenue from a given area (the Midwest) to another region

of the country (the coasts).”

Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 7

Wind Power

Minwind has been getting an increasing number of

calls from other rural communities and producer groups

wanting to know more about its business model and where

to find the right people to help pursue a wind project. That’s

both good and bad. It indicates strong interest in community ownership, but also points to a general lack of knowledge and leadership in how to pursue such projects. 

The Midwest badly needs more energy-leader development programs — and not just for the wind industry, but for

other renewable energy industries as well, including the

next phase of ethanol technology, says Willers. “There is a

real struggle in the Midwest to develop the kind of leaders

who can do this. Communities with strong leaders are

doing dramatically better, and the differences will only get

bigger.”

Willers is a frequent speaker at the state’s colleges,

where he tells graduate students about the economics of

wind power and the skills they will need to run or start

renewable energy companies. “They are the ones who will

determine the future of how these companies will be

owned and operated.”

He emphasizes that all those math and the physics

classes students are taking will help them run a wind farm.

“You need these skills to determine the pitch of the blades,

or to find the best location for a turbine. This is real life!” he

tells them. “If you are going to go school to study engineering or mathematics or economics, this is what you are

there for.”

Minwind also works with busloads of area high school

students, walking them through the project and trying to

help them understand how their communities can get

involved in renewable energy and to start them thinking

about the studies they will need to pursue to be part of this

industry.

Wind power creates good jobs so more young people

can stay in their home communities, Willers says. “Turbine

service technicians with a few years of experience will

probably make more money than any co-op manager. You

need both a mechanical engineering background and a

computer background, because these turbines are very

technologically complex.” ■

Energy leadership

development urgently needed
(Editor’s note: James Newby, assistant administrator of

Electric Programs for USDA Rural Development, notes that

tax-exempt organizations are not eligible for production tax

credits, which is why Clean Renewable Energy Bonds

(CREBS) were created. He notes that CREBS provide the

same level of financial incentives to cooperatives as does the

PTC.)

Also hurting the U.S. wind industry is the loss of U.S.

core industrial manufacturing capacity. Most wind turbine

manufacturing companies are European, and with the Euro

at record high exchange levels vs. the dollar, it has caused

turbine prices to soar. There is also a backlog of orders,

putting even more upward pressure on prices. 

In just the past year, the average cost for a two-megawatt

turbine has climbed from about $2.1 million to $2.5 million.

These cost escalations have a huge impact on the viability of

wind power.

“All of our parts are also going to be costing more,” says

Willers. “And patent laws mean we have to buy parts over

there.” Some growth in blade and tower manufacturing is

occurring in the United States, “but it is growing slowly,”

says Willers. 

Congress has been extending the energy law in only oneor two-year increments, while Europeans are working on 10-

year renewable energy programs, Willers notes. “The United

States needs a long-term energy policy that would encourage

factories to be built in this country.”

Expansion coming

Minwind has four more expansion phases on the drawing

board right now, which it hopes to complete over the next

four years. Willers declined to divulge the details, but

stressed that “we will almost certainly be expanding.” 

The co-op currently operates with two full-time

employees (Willers and a bookkeeper) and two part-time staff

members. It uses contractors for turbine service and

maintenance, although it will likely hire its own maintenance

employees when growth and the economy of scale justifies it. 

Should more producer and community groups consider

building and operating wind farms? 

In some case, yes, says Willers. “But it depends on the

group. If you have an aggressive, well thought-out business

plan and people on board who are experienced in starting

companies, you may do well. But if you are thinking that you

are going to own some wind turbines and then just sit back

and collect the checks — and you don’t want to understand all

of the technology — then you probably should not pursue it.” 

Willers says farmer co-ops could develop wind ventures

for their members, but because most co-ops cannot use

8 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

continued on page 39
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 9

Wind Power

SDA Rural

Development’s Section

9006 Renewable

Energy Systems loan

and grant program is

helping to finance wind power projects

throughout the nation, including two

new wind farms which recently began

operating in Iowa. 

The Crosswind Energy wind farm

near Ruthven, Iowa, is composed of 10

two-megawatt (MW) turbines, each of

which is owned by an LLC that

represents partnerships between 10

Iowa producers and California-based

Edison Mission Energy. Edison’s

involvement will be phased out after 10

years of operating the turbines, which

are estimated to have a 25-year lifespan.

The 21 MW of power generated by

the wind farm is being sold to Cornbelt

Power Cooperative in Humboldt,

Iowa. 

The project was made possible, in

part, by $250,000 in Section 9006

guaranteed loan funds, $302,125 in

USDA Value-Added Producer Grant

technical assistance funds, and $2.3

million in Section 9006 grants. During

the past four years, USDA Rural

Development has awarded $6.6 million

in guaranteed loans and grants to 37

large wind energy projects in Iowa.

The Hardin Hilltop Wind Farm,

northwest of Jefferson, Iowa, in Greene

County, is another example of how the

9006 program is being used to promote

wind power. USDA Rural Development

provided $1.7 million in grants to the

producers and individuals who

developed this seven-turbine wind farm.

Edison Mission Energy has also

invested in this wind project. 

Interstate Power and Light Co.

(IPL), a subsidiary of Alliant Energy

Corporation, will purchase the 16 MW

of renewable energy generated by the

Hardin Hilltop project, which began

commercial operations in May. 

Each of the investors owns a single

wind turbine, which can generate more

than two MW. IPL is eligible to receive

the Iowa small renewable tax credit. 

Iowa college trains wind

technicians

Maintenance and monitoring work at

both wind farms will be done by

graduates of the wind energy program

at Iowa Lakes Community College.

The two-year, college-level program is

believed to the first of its kind in the

nation.

The college recently held a ribbon

cutting to open a $1.7 million addition

to its Sustainable Energy Education

Center in Estherville, which houses the

Wind Energy and Turbine Technology

program. The program opened with 15

students three years ago but had grown

to 66 wind energy students by this fall.

“This one-of-a-kind program is

giving students the skills and knowledge

necessary to not only operate and

maintain wind turbines throughout the

state, but to keep Iowa on the forefront

of the renewable energy frontier,” Iowa

Governor Chet Culver said in a letter

read at the event in October. 

PPM Energy provided a gift of

$100,000 to support the college’s wind

program. “With PPM’s aggressive

growth plans — and each new wind

farm needing skilled, safety-conscious

workers — strong training programs

are essential to meeting our future

staffing needs,” said Kevin Devlin, vice

president of PPM Energy.

How 9006 program works

“The Section 9006 program was

created in the 2002 Farm Bill for

financing both renewable energy and

energy efficiency projects,” Mark

Reisinger, USDA Rural Development

state director for Iowa, said while

speaking at the ribbon-cutting

ceremony for the Crosswinds project

last summer. He explained that a grant

can be made for up to 25 percent of

total eligible costs for a project, with a

maximum of $500,000 for a renewable

energy project and a maximum of

$250,000 for an energy efficiency

project. 

A guaranteed loan under the 9006

program can be made for up to 50

percent of total eligible costs up to a

maximum of $10 million. A

combination grant and guaranteed loan

can be made for up to 50 percent of

total eligible costs. 

“This program helps rural businesses

or agricultural producers develop

renewable energy or make energysaving improvements to their facilities

or farms,” says Reisinger. Information,

applications, forms, and other tools

regarding the energy program can be

found at: www.rurdev.usda.gov. ■

U

Iowa wind farms supported by 

USDA Renewable Energy Program 

Guests check out the apropos wallpaper

in a new classroom at Iowa Lakes

Community College, which now has 66

students enrolled in its two-year wind

power program. 
10 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

Alan Borst, Agricultural Economist 

USDA Rural Development

ind energy is a bright

spot on the rural

economic development

horizon. Wind power

projects across rural

America contribute to local and

regional economic growth and

development. The wind energy industry

creates new jobs and new sources of

revenue for farmers and ranchers, and it

increases the local tax base of rural

communities. 

Wind turbines generate homegrown

energy that helps secure America’s

energy future during uncertain times

while reducing pollution and conserving

water resources. Wind energy is the

fastest growing energy source in the

world, and numerous rural communities

are reaping the benefits.

Why wind power?

Among the major benefits our nation

derives from wind energy are:

• Wind power is a clean energy source.

Its fuel is the wind and it produces no

pollution. Wind power is a renewable

energy source created every day by

the heating and cooling of the earth. 

• The price of wind power is not

affected by fuel price increases or

supply disruptions. It improves both

America’s trade balance and energy

security by reducing our dependence

on fossil fuel imports. 

• Wind power creates jobs — more jobs

per watt than all other energy sources,

including oil and coal. Wind turbines

can be produced domestically

(although most are not, at this time).

• Due to technological advances, wind

power can cost as little as four to six

cents per kilowatt hour, making it

competitive with conventional energy

sources.

• Wind power can promote rural

development by providing steady,

ongoing income for farmers and other

W

Wind Power Energizing 

Increasing share of U.S. wind energy sector 

held by community and producer groups 
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 11

landowners whose other income is

often cyclical, subject to the sharp ups

and downs of farm commodity

markets. Land used for wind turbines

can also be used for other purposes,

such as grazing and farmland.

• There are enough reliably windy

areas in the United States to produce

three times as much electricity as the

nation uses today.

Wind industry trends in ‘07

There are several important trends

in the U.S. wind energy sector that will

shape its near term future, including:

High growth — U.S. wind-power

capacity grew by 26 percent in 2006,

and similar growth is expected in 2007

and beyond;

Turbine supply shortage — Some wind

project developers have been waiting up

to two years or longer for wind turbine

orders;

Bigger wind turbines — Larger and

more costly, but also more efficient,

wind turbines have become increasingly

popular and have driven down the cost

of wind-generated electricity;

Wind project developer consolidation —

Globalization and the maturing of the

domestic industry have resulted in

increasing concentration of wind-power

ownership; 

Policy incentives continue to drive the

industry — The Federal Production Tax

Credit, Clean Renewable Energy Bond

program, Renewable Energy

Production Incentive program and

USDA Rural Development’s Renewable

Energy and Energy Efficiency program

(also called the “9006 program”) have

each helped to spur investments in wind

projects.

The trend of most immediate

importance to smaller community wind

Wind Power

Rural America

Wind power can cost as little as 4 to 6 cents

per kilowatt hour, making it competitive with

conventional energy sources. USDA photos

by Dan Campbell 
projects is the turbine shortage, which has

been pushing up development costs. A

recent study by the U.S. Department of

Energy found that average turbine costs

rose 17 percent in 2006, and they are

projected to rise another 14 percent this

year. This has forced wind project

developers to work out deals years before

beginning construction. 

Larger developers have used their size

and buying power to aggressively secure

large numbers of turbines. Smaller, community wind

developers, however, have had to delay projects when they

found that turbine suppliers were either out of stock or not

interested in filling comparatively small orders. There are

positive signs, however, that more manufacturers are entering

the industry, and that existing suppliers are expanding their

production to better meet increasing demand.

Windustry is a Minneapolis-based nonprofit organization

working to increase wind energy opportunities for rural

landowners and communities by providing technical support

and creating tools for analysis. Marin Byrne, a Windustry

associate, outlined several strategies that community wind

developers have been using to secure turbines in the current

tight market. They have worked out “piggyback” deals with

large wind developers under which a few turbines are set

aside for smaller wind projects. Small wind projects may also

aggregate their turbine orders into a single, larger-volume

order. 

Developers of smaller projects have purchased refurbished

wind turbines that have been recycled from other projects.

Much like buying a used car, however, caution is required in

the purchase of used turbines. Turbine manufacturers who

are newer to the U.S. market may also be more willing to

negotiate with community wind developers. There are also

several investment firms that have secured supplies of

turbines and may be willing to supply turbines in exchange

for a significant stake in the project, although these deals

should be weighed carefully.

Externally-owned and community-owned wind

energy

According to Windustry, “the key feature of community

wind power is that local community members own and have a

significant financial stake in the project beyond just land lease

payments and tax revenue.” Community wind has a small but

growing share of the U.S. wind energy sector.

• Externally-owned wind: Traditional wind ownership

structures generally include large-scale wind projects, often

50 megawatts (MW) in capacity or larger, that are

developed, installed and operated by large corporate

owners with headquarters in distant locations.

• Community wind: locally-owned and operated projects that

can be any scale, but are typically smaller.

Of 11,603 MW of wind energy installed

in the United States, 11,182 MW has

traditional ownership while 421 MW is

community owned. Community-owned

wind power has grown from almost nothing

in 2000 to a 3.6 percent share of national

wind power today, and it is growing at an accelerating rate.

Benefits of community ownership

Lisa Daniels of Windustry says community-owned wind

power has all the benefits of corporate wind, plus:

• Greater stimulation of local economies;

• Increased local energy independence;

• Delayed need for new transmission lines;

• Increased competition in energy markets;

• Greater acceptance of wind power.

Community wind ownership is diverse, and includes

cooperatives and LLCs, with the core of the membership

often being farmers and ranchers. A look at the structure of

U.S. community-owned wind power in 2004 shows the

following, according to the Environment Law & Policy

Center:

• Private 67 percent 

• Municipal utilities 21 percent

• Rural electric cooperatives 7 percent

• Schools 5 percent 

• Tribal .2 percent

Co-op model traits and wind power

Traditional types of cooperatives have great potential to

develop wind energy resources in rural America. These

include:

Marketing cooperatives — A cooperative that markets

products for its farmer members. Rural landowners with

good wind resources could cooperatively market the

electricity generated from their turbines.

Supply cooperatives — A cooperative that provides supplies

or inputs for its farmer members. Rural landowners with

good wind resources could cooperatively purchase turbines

and services and supplies to maintain them.

Bargaining cooperatives — A cooperative that bargains with

buyers for price and other terms of trade on behalf of its

members as its sole or principal function. Rural landowners

with good wind resources could cooperatively bargain with

competing wind project developers for the best leasing and

revenue deals.

Consumer cooperatives — A purchasing organization formed

for the benefit of the consumer. Rural resident members of

Wind turbines help secure America’s

energy future while reducing pollution and

conserving water resources.

12 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 13

an electric utility wanting to purchase wind-generated

electricity could direct their co-op to operate a turbine.

Why cooperative wind?

Reasons for promoting cooperative ownership of wind

power include: 

• Few individual rural residents can afford the more efficient

and cost-effective larger turbines, while cooperatives

provide a familiar structure for local participation and joint

investment.

• Market power — Co-ops can help ensure that their

landowner-producer or utility-consumer members receive

more equitable treatment in the marketplace through

centralizing and coordinating deals.

• Competitive yardstick — A co-op offers a way for members

to compare the prices and terms of competing wind project

developers or rural utilities with which members could

potentially deal.

• Patient capital — Cooperatives are owned by their local

members rather than by outside investors, and thus may

develop or maintain a wind-energy project that would not

meet the expectations of outside investors.

• Local benefits maximized — Several studies confirm that

community wind provides greater local economic returns

and employment. Co-ops return surplus revenues to

members and the local community.

• Local leadership — Co-ops produce informed and

committed community leaders who are better able to

contribute to local development efforts.

Utility co-op wind ownership 

Some electric cooperatives own wind projects, ranging in

size from one turbine up to large wind farms. These windproject owners include Basin Electric Power Cooperative in

the Dakotas (see page 20), Minnkota Power Cooperative Inc.

in North Dakota, Kotzebue Electric Association in Alaska,

Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Great River Energy in

Minnesota and Illinois Rural Electric Cooperative. 

Many rural electric co-ops also support wind power by

making long-term power purchase agreements with large

wind project developers. 

In recognition of these cooperatives’ contributions to the

wind industry, a “Wind Cooperative of the Year” award has

been established by U.S. Department of Energy’s Wind

Powering America effort, the National Rural Electric

Cooperative Association and the Cooperative Research

Network. The 2006 recipient was Associated Electric

Cooperative Inc. in Missouri, while the Alaska Village

Electric Cooperative was also recognized. Previous awardees

have included the Illinois Rural Electric Cooperative,

Western Farmers Electric Cooperative in Oklahoma, Holy

Cross Energy in Colorado, Basin Electric Power Cooperative

and Great River Energy. 

Rural electrics are likely to be more active in wind energy

because:

• Wind energy is becoming more economically competitive;

• More rural electric co-op members are beginning to

demand renewable energy;

• Federal incentive programs applicable to community wind,

such as USDA Rural Development’s Section 9006 and

Value-Added Producer Grant programs, are being used by

utility co-ops to reduce their wind development costs;

• Some rural electric cooperatives are now covered by state

Renewable Portfolio Standards, which mandate the share of

renewable energy that co-ops must purchase or generate

for their members.

Rural electric co-ops will be more involved in supplying

wind energy for their members, both as purchasers from

large corporate wind farms and as developers of community

wind projects.

Landowner wind cooperatives

There are no major examples of U.S. wind energy projects

owned by landowners with strong wind resources that are

formally incorporated as cooperatives. Several wind energy

projects have producers as their majority owner-members,

but they are organized as limited liability companies (LLC),

although they usually operate according to cooperative

principles. All were located in Minnesota until June 2007,

when two farmer group wind projects were commissioned in

Iowa.

From Trimont Area Wind Farm’s (see page 14) active role

in a wind project pre-development process, to Minwind

Energy’s (see page 4) outright development and ownership of

wind projects, several farmer groups in Minnesota have led

the way in cooperative wind. Minnesota’s energy policy

environment uniquely fosters cooperative wind through

power purchase requirements, standard agreements and

power production incentives. 

Nebraska and Iowa are considering versions of

Minnesota’s Community-Based Energy Development

program — the pillar of its supportive community wind

environment. Iowa and Illinois also have incentive programs

for community wind that can be used by rural groups. 

Landowner bargaining groups for negotiating with wind

developers have been organized at several sites across rural

America. With examples of farmer group wind business

models that work and increasingly supportive federal and

state policy environments, landowner group wind projects are

likely to continue to be developed. ■

Wind Power
14 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

By Dan Campbell, Editor 

f any place on earth was

made to order for a

wind farm, Trimont,

Minn., would seem to

be it. Not only do

prairie winds blow here most of the

year, but a major power transmission

line runs through the area and there is a

nearby electric peaking plant (which

kicks into service during periods of

peak energy demand). 

So when Great River Energy — an

electricity generation and transmission

co-op – put out a proposal in 2003

soliciting bids from anyone wanting to

supply it with 100 megawatts of

renewable energy, it got Neal Von

Ohlen and some other area farmers

thinking very seriously about

developing a community-owned wind

farm. 

“We drew a big square

(encompassing about 16.5 square miles)

around the peaking plant and focused

on getting those landowners to join in

an LLC,” says Von Ohlen, who farms

about 1,700 acres of corn and soybeans

with his father and brother. 

The farmers then hired a consultant

to pursue a project that they hoped

would result in the first large-scale,

farmer-owned wind farm in Minnesota,

says Von Ohlen, standing in the

driveway of his farm, nearly in the

shadow of a turbine that

seems to sprout from his

grain bins. 

They were told the

logistics looked good, so

50 area landowners

formed Trimont Area

Wind Farm LLC

(TAWF). At that point,

they had only about three

weeks to pull their

proposal together and get

it to Great River Energy.

They managed to meet

the April 30 deadline, but

TAWF was far from

alone in seeking the

contract. Of 65 bids

submitted, 62 were from

would-be wind energy

developers.

Trimont bid wins

contract

After two months of

reviewing the proposals,

Great River Energy —

which supplies power to

28 local rural electric

utilities with 600,000

members — put the

Trimont bid on its short list of finalists.

Two months after that, Trimont Wind

was selected as the winner. 

Of the 50 landowners who joined the

LLC, 47 are Minnesota residents, and

half are active farmers. More than

$500,000 was raised from the members

to pay the consultant, legal fees and

related costs. 

“At that point, we still thought we

would own the project,” says Von

I

Predevelopment work nets higher

royalties for landowners

“By delivering signed leases and a power purchase

agreement, we were able to get a much better-thanaverage deal,” says Neal Von Ohlen. Opposite page:

Minnesota towns such as Jackson are benefiting from a

stronger rural economy created by wind power and

other renewable energy development. USDA photos by

Dan Campbell 
Wind Power
16 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

Ohlen, who is manager of TAWF.

What eventually killed that dream was

the determination that their LLCcooperative would not be able to use

the production tax credits, which can

offset a major share of the cost for wind

turbines (see related story, page 7).

“That ruled out our being the owners.”

Some other ownership options were

studied, such as a contract under which

ownership would “flip” to the co-op

after 12 years. “But we were a little

nervous about suddenly becoming the

owner of 13-year-old wind turbines, not

knowing what kind of shape they would

be in at that point. So we instead

decided to team up with a major wind

power developer.”

Predevelopment work pays off

By doing the predevelopment work,

including the always tough job of

aggregating the needed land in the right

location, and by having the power

contract in hand to supply Great River

Energy, TAWF was in a much stronger

position than landowners typically are

to negotiate a strong deal on behalf of

its members. 

The co-op ultimately opted to enter

a contract with PPM Energy, a unit of

ScottishPower, based in Scotland, which

has more than 1,700 megawatts of wind

energy in operation or under

construction around the globe. PPM

Energy built, owns and operates the

turbines. 

TAWF not only negotiated land

lease payments, but got its members a

percent of the gross power revenue

generated by the wind farm. As the

efficiency of the operation improves,

the percent of revenue going to the

LLC will also rise, says Von Ohlen.

Members will earn a minimum yearly

return on their investment of 50

percent.

“By delivering signed leases and a

power purchase agreement, we were

able to get a much better than average

deal,” he says. “The industry standard is

for a lease payment of $2,000 to $3,000

per tower, but we were able to get

$4,000.”

The wind farm includes 67, 1.5-

megawatt turbines, manufactured by

General Electric. Each turbine stands

265 feet high from base to hub. About

75 percent of the towers were built in

Fargo, N.D., as were most of the

blades, Von Ohlen says.

Only minor disruptions

to farming

Of the wind farm’s 8,500-acre

“footprint,” 8,000 acres are in the LLC.

Construction started in May 2005 and

was completed within six months. Von

Ohlen says only minor disruptions to

farming operations were caused by the

construction.

The turbines themselves take up very

little land, with the biggest space

demand being for the 16-foot-wide

access roads. “Even if the road is a half

mile long, that still equals only about an

acre,” Von Ohlen notes. And the access

roads can come in handy for farming

operations.

The LLC still holds regular board

meetings, with its main function being

to administer and distribute the

payments from the wind farm to its

members. 

Von Ohlen says a study showed that

for this project, the ultimate net return

to members will be about the same as

had they owned the turbines outright.

“The biggest difference is that we will

get more of the return in the early years

of the project, whereas with direct

ownership, more of the returns would

have come in the later years,” he

explains. 

PPM Energy has an option in 15

years to pay a lump sum to TAWF and

would then own all the power revenue.

In that case, the LLC would dissolve,

and from that point on the power

company would simply work directly

with landowners to pay land lease fees. 

The wind farm is expected to

generate more than $1 million annually

for the local economy through a

combination of taxes paid, easement

payments and power payments to the

LLC. 

Great River Energy is putting out a

new proposal for another wind farm in

the area, and Van Ohlen says a new

LLC is being formed to again do the

predevelopment work and negotiate a

contract on behalf of its members. His

family holds land in the new area as

well, “so we’ll be involved in both. But

they will be separate entities, each with

their own boards.” 

How is life with so many wind

turbines suddenly sprouting up from

their corn and soybean fields? “It’s

definitely something to get used to

when they first go up. But now they are

just part of the scenery — you hardly

even notice them.” ■

A wind turbine seems to sprout from grain

storage bins on Neal Van Ohlen’s farm. 
By Dan Campbell, Editor 

or dramatic evidence

of the rapidly

developing renewable

energy economy in

rural America, focus

your attention on the Corn Plus

Ethanol plant, near Winnebago, Minn.

Not only is this producer-owned

cooperative squeezing 44 million

gallons of ethanol out of its members’

corn each year, but two giant, 2.1

megawatt wind turbines were also

recently erected, which will supply

about 40 percent of the electricity needed to

operate the plant. That’s enough power to light

up 1,000 homes each year. Which makes this

plant a “renewable times two” operation. 

The turbines were installed in August and

were to be commissioned by mid-October. 

Corn Plus teamed up with John Deere and

Renewable Energy Solutions on the wind turbine

project. Much of the initial cost for the turbines

will be offset through the use of production tax

credits (PTCs). 

“We couldn’t pass the tax credits on to our

members, but John Deere can use them,” says

General Manager Keith Kor.

Deere provided financing for the turbines and

the construction crews that installed them. These

two turbines were among 100 that Deere

Wind Power

Renewable x 2

Corn Plus taps wind power to

operate ethanol plant

F

Turbines tower above the

Corn Plus ethanol plant,

which will get nearly half

of its electrical power

from wind. USDA photos

by Dan Campbell
purchased from Suzlon Energy Ltd.

After 10 years, Corn Plus will have the

option of buying the turbines back from

Deere. Corn Plus will buy the wind

energy from John Deere.

Dan Moore, director of Renewable

Energy Solutions, was quoted in the

Mankato Free Press as saying that he

thinks some other ethanol plants will

follow the example of Corn Plus’ use of

wind power. “It just makes so much

sense — a renewable making a

renewable.”

The co-op’s wind electricity price

will be locked in for 10 years. “We’re

getting a good price,” Kor says.

The co-op’s goal is to eventually run

the ethanol plant without any need for

outside energy.

Slashing natural gas needs

Helping it reach this

goal is a new, fluidizedbed boiler — the only

one of its kind — which

creates steam to run the

plant. The boiler burns

corn syrup produced as a

byproduct during the

ethanol-making process. 

The fluidized-bed

boiler has already

reduced natural gas needs

by 50 to 60 percent. This

will save the plant about

$6 million to $7 million

per year, Kor says.

Corn Plus has 750

members, most of whom

are farmers. There are

two sister-business

entities: Corn Plus Cooperative and

Corn Plus LLLP, a limited liability

limited partnership that operates the

ethanol plant. 

The ethanol plant originally opened

in 1994 with a 15 million gallon

capacity, but by 2001 had been

expanded to 44 million gallons.

“About a year and a half ago,

everyone was advising ethanol plant

operators to expand,” Kor says. “But we

evaluated the situation and decided our

best approach

was to become a

low-cost

producer.” Hence

the decision to

take firm steps

toward reducing

the energy needs

of the operation.

Reducing its

gas needs may also yield other benefits

for Corn Plus. In August, it joined the

Chicago Climate Exchange, a

greenhouse gas emissions registry and

trading program that seeks to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions. Corn Plus

will receive carbon credits based on its

reduced gas consumption. At the

current rate, it will receive about 42,000

tons of credits, with a value of about

$240,000.

Kor is also excited about the

possibilities of two revolutionary new

pelletized products Corn Plus is

producing: a fertilizer and a livestock

feed. Both are derived from ethanol

byproducts. 

The fluidized-bed boiler produces

about 25 tons of ash a day, which is

being turned into about 9,000 tons of

fertilizer pellets per year. These pellets

are rich in phosphorous and potassium,

as well as other micronutrients, Kor

says. 

The co-op also has a patent pending

for a process it developed to pelletize

dried distillers grains (DDG). One of

the big knocks against using DDG for

livestock feed is that it tends to stick to

the sides of bins and trucks (see

“Measuring the gains of distillers

grains,” page 18 in the Sept.-Oct 2006

issue of Rural Cooperatives). By turning

DDG into pellets, Kor says it will

18 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

Keith Kor, right, began working in the ethanol industry in 1982. Left,

Corn Plus is producing two pelletized products: a fertilizer and a

livestock feed. Both are derived from ethanol byproducts.
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 19

greatly ease use in farm feeding

operations. 

Deep roots in industry

Kor began working in the ethanol

industry in 1982 at a small plant in

Houston, Minn., and later worked at

plants in Iowa and Jamaica. He’s been at

Corn Plus since 1995.

“I never thought the industry would

grow so much so fast,” he says. “There

were so many naysayers all these years.

I can recall seeing filling stations with

signs that bragged ‘We don’t sell

ethanol.’ Now they do the opposite.”

Having been in the business since its

infancy, Kor has seen ethanol go though

a number of up and down cycles, and

doesn’t seem overly worried by the

current slump in prices. When

interviewed in late September, ethanol

prices had fallen about 25 percent from

the high levels of just a year or so

before. 

“High ethanol prices led to a rash of

plant construction, and now in some

areas there is a glut of ethanol. But

plans for many plants are being shelved

now, while others can no longer get

financing,” Kor says, adding that he is

confident that the market will stabilize

and correct. 

“What now concerns me the most is

that so many of these new plants are

not farmer owned,” says Kor. “Outside

investors poured their money in and

turned ethanol into a gold rush. Now

we’ll have to see how much

consolidation occurs and how that

impacts the ownership structure of the

industry.”

As for cellulosic ethanol, Kor says he

has few doubts that it is coming. “And I

think that’s great. I think you will see

cellulosic ethanol plants right next door

to corn ethanol plants, and they will be

using corn stover and prairie grasses.

We need both kinds of plants.” ■

Renewable energy is “the greatest opportunity for wealth

creation in rural areas in our lifetime.” That’s what Under

Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development Thomas Dorr

told a gathering of stakeholders during the formal announcement of the 2008 Washington International Renewable Energy Conference (WIREC) on Oct. 2 at U.S. State Department

headquarters in Washington, D.C.

Billed as “an international platform for government, private sector and non-governmental leaders to jointly address

the goal of advancing renewable energy,” WIREC 2008 will

be held March 4-6 at the Washington Convention Center.

Dorr joined State Department

Under Secretary for Democracy

and Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky in urging federal and local government officials and private sector

leaders to attend the event. 

Renewable energy “offers an

extraordinary opportunity for agricultural producers,” Dorr told the

gathering.“ There are opportunities

at every point in the value chain.” 

Dorr said WIREC is “an opportunity to share our own experiences,

and ultimately to learn from the

best practices in other countries as

well. It is important in this discussion to remember that renewable

energy is, in large part, rural energy: ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, biodiesel and biomass technology, all of which rely primarily on farm and forest

resources. Wind, because of its siting requirements, is also

largely a rural resource.”

Some solar and geothermal technologies may also be

suitable for deployment in urban as well as rural areas, Dorr

noted. But these energy sources are still more likely to be

sited in rural areas, especially for industrial-scale projects.

The conference should provide invaluable learning

opportunities and chances to make government and industry

contacts for producer and utility co-ops and LLCs that are

involved in, or are considering,

renewable energy projects. 

Dorr emphasized his belief

that the strong growth in U.S.

renewable energy resources in

the past few years shows that

private enterprise is up to the

challenge of meeting future

energy needs. “If there’s one

thing we know,” he declared,

“it’s that markets work.”

For registration and other

information on the 2008 WIREC

conference, please visit:

www.wirec2008.gov. ■

WIREC Conference set for March 4-6 in D.C.

“We are interested in exploring investment, as well

as business models, that encourage participation by

farmers and other rural investors in emerging

renewable energy industries,” said Thomas Dorr,

under secretary for USDA Rural Development. With

him is Paula Dobriansky of the U.S. State

Department. USDA photo by Bob Nichols 

Wind Power
Stepping up to 

Basin Electric sees wind power as key part of 

the plate
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 21

By Stephen Thompson,

Assistant Editor 

or Basin

Electric

Power

Cooperative,

wind power is

just one of many technologies

being explored to reduce the

co-op’s carbon footprint.

Basin Electric, a generation

and transmission utility co-op

based in Bismarck, N.D., is

pursuing an aggressive effort

on many fronts to meet

future demands for electric

power while reducing

emissions of CO2. 

With the U.S. government

getting serious about

reducing carbon emissions,

the cooperative has decided

to try to get out ahead of the

curve. “We recognize that

carbon is an issue, and that

we need to move forward on

it,” says Floyd Robb, vice

president for communications

and marketing support. At

Basin’s 2005 annual meeting,

members passed a resolution calling for a full 10 percent of

their power demands to be met by renewable, or otherwise

“green,” sources by 2010. 

A study on the issue by the Electric Power Research

Institute (EPRI) offers no “silver bullets,” says Robb. “The

only way to meet expected requirements is to use a whole

range of methods.” The

cooperative has stepped up to

the plate, participating in

projects that include carbon

sequestration, waste-heat

recovery and coal gasification,

as well as wind generation.

“We believe we’re on the

cutting edge,” he says.

Basin Electric currently has

a total wind generating

capacity of 136 megawatts, but

recently launched an effort to

add up to another 300

megawatts-worth of wind

power. 

Storing wind-generated

power

The co-op is making

progress on an even more

futuristic goal: a way to store

and use wind power generated

during periods of low demand.

Basin’s wind power is

currently generated by a mix

of turbines owned by the coop and other turbines owned

by independent wind

developers. The new turbines

will be wholly owned by Basin

Electric, with the project scheduled for construction in three

stages. 

The first 99 megawatts will be generated by turbines

going up near Minot, N.D. Sites for the second stage are still

being explored, while the third stage is still in the initial

planning phase. Utility-scale wind turbines currently available

each have a capacity of 1.5 megawatts; so producing 99

megawatts requires a wind farm of at least 66 of the immense

structures. 

Projected cost of each of the first two stages is between

$200 and $210 million, to be financed through loans

guaranteed by USDA Rural Development. 

F

Wind Power

The Great Plains Synfuel plant, run by a Basin Electric

subsidiary, converts dirty, low-quality lignite coal into cleanburning natural gas. The carbon dioxide generated by the

conversion is recovered and injected into Canadian oil fields,

forcing out petroleum that would otherwise be inaccessible.

multi-pronged strategy to reduce greenhouse gases

Basin Electric purchases the entire power output of this wind farm

in Wilton, N. D., which is operated by FPL Energy LLC. New turbines

to be built in nearby Minot will be owned by the co-op. Photos

courtesy Basin Electric Cooperative 
22 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

The problem with wind generation, of course, is that the

wind doesn’t always blow when you need power, and it often

blows when you don’t need it. There is currently no feasible

way to store electricity generated during low-demand

periods, but Basin Electric has invested $2 million to explore

a practical alternative, as part of the wind-to-hydrogen

consortium of cooperatives and other institutions. 

At a site owned by North Dakota State University near

Minot, N.D, excess power from nearby Basin Electric wind

turbines is being used to generate hydrogen gas. The power

is run at low voltage through an electrolyzer, which uses

electric current to break water molecules apart into hydrogen

and oxygen. The hydrogen is stored under pressure and is

used to operate vehicles configured to burn the gas in their

engines.

The advantage of hydrogen as a fuel is that it produces

only water when burned, offering a completely non-polluting

way to power vehicles. At the moment, it’s one of the few

ways to store non-peak energy.

The electrolyzer is hooked up to the power grid, says

Robb, but power use is controlled so that only the amount

generated by the wind is used to produce gas. At the

moment, the co-op fuels three “flex-fuel” pickup trucks with

hydrogen. Gas from the project is also used to run a tractor

owned by the university in Fargo. 

“You can put your nose right next to the exhaust pipe and

smell nothing,” says Robb.

Capturing unused heat

Another way to reduce carbon emissions is to capture

unused heat and use it to generate power. That’s the goal of

another Basin Electric demonstration project on the

Northern Border Pipeline, which transports natural gas from

Canada through Montana and the Dakotas to the Chicago

area. 

Gas pipelines require compressor stations about every 80

miles, powered by gas turbines. The turbines generate a great

deal of waste heat, which is usually exhausted into the

atmosphere.

The project uses a thermal oil to absorb exhaust heat,

which is routed to a heat exchanger where it boils liquid

pentane. The heated pentane gas is used to drive a turbinepowered generator, which feeds the electricity to nearby

power lines. The spent pentane gas is condensed and fed

back into the heat exchanger in a closed loop. 

The program is run by Ormat Technologies under

agreement with Basin Electric, which purchases the power. It

currently has energy-recovery units on four pumping

stations, each one of which recovers about 5 megawatts of

energy — a not-inconsiderable amount. “It’s the closest thing

to free energy you can get,” says Robb. The only drawback is

that to be economically feasible, the station has to be within a

reasonable distance of power-transmission lines. Four more

units are planned.

Most of the cooperative’s base-load generating capacity is

fired by coal — a fuel that faces increasing opposition from

environmentalists, as well from as citizens leery of the impact

of coal burning on local air quality. 

Coal-fired generation plants usually use bituminous coal as

fuel. Low-quality lignite, or “brown,” coal is abundant and

inexpensive in North Dakota. But it has several drawbacks: its

combustion produces even more CO2 and pollutants than

bituminous coal, and due to its low energy content, it’s not

economical to transport.

The co-op uses innovative technology to develop lignite’s

potential while minimizing its environmental impact. At the

Great Plains Synfuel plant in Beulah, N.D., operated by

Basin Electric subsidiary Dakota Gasification Co., brown coal

is used to make natural gas, which burns much more cleanly

and is more economical to transport. 

Pumping CO2 into oilfields

Under a demonstration project, the CO2 produced by the

synthesizing process is purchased by two Canadian oil firms:

EnCana and Apache Oil. It is piped 205 miles, across the

border into Saskatchewan, where it is injected deep into two

oil fields that are far past their peak production.

The gas forces otherwise unrecoverable petroleum to the

surface. EnCana says that it hopes to extend the life of its oil

field by as much as 25 years, and pull 135 million additional

barrels of oil from it.

The project is the largest carbon sequestration effort in

the world, and is already responsible for storing 10 million

tons of the CO2. The project is being expanded to store 3

million tons of CO2 each year. 

Initial data show that the carbon dioxide is staying where

it’s put, making a tangible contribution to the effort to reduce

greenhouse gas emissions, as well as increasing domestic

energy supplies, Robb says. The success of the project has

encouraged the cooperative to move on to the next step:

looking for ways to remove CO2 from the flue emissions of

conventional coal-fired generation plants.

Basin Electric is currently evaluating proposals from six

vendors to build a demonstration flue-gas carbon

sequestration project. A decision is expected in December.

Robb proudly asserts that Basin Electric is the only utility

seeking to remove carbon dioxide from flue-gas. “Other

utilities talk about it,” he says. “We’re actually doing it.” ■

Heat-recovery units on Basin’s Northern Border natural gas pipeline recover

waste heat generated by gas turbine-driven pumps that move gas along the

pipeline. The heat is then used to generate electrical power.
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 23

Wind Power

By Anne Mayberry 

USDA Rural Development

Rural Utilities Programs 

riving across rural

Illinois in December,

the landscape is one of

pale gold crop residue

set against rich brown

soil. But in one part of rural Pike

County, Illinois, the landscape has

changed dramatically. Now, towering

365 feet above the fields is a wind

turbine erected by Illinois Rural

Electric Cooperative (Illinois REC). 

Since it was installed in May, 2005,

the turbine — Illinois’ first — has been

producing power at full capacity 30

percent of the time, depending on wind

speed and frequency. This is in keeping

with projections in the project

feasibility study.

Many parts of the nation, including

much of Illinois, were previously

thought to lack the wind resources

necessary for wind power. But wind

turbine technology has improved

greatly in recent years, with utility-scale

turbines generating electricity at wind

D

UTILITY CO-OP CONNECTION

Many parts of the nation previously thought to lack wind resources can now generate wind

power, thanks to advances in turbine technology. This turbine was recently erected by the

Illinois Rural Electric Cooperative (IREC). Photo courtesy IREC

Advanced

technology

enables Illinois

electric co-op

to tap into wind

power
speeds as low as six miles per hour. 

“The new technology allows the

turbines to operate at a lower wind

speed, and that changes the equation of

where they can be located,” says Sean

Middleton, the co-op’s manager of

engineering. 

States such as North and South

Dakota still have an advantage because

the wind blows so much more there.

“In the Dakotas, the 30 percent full

capacity we see in Illinois would likely

be closer to 40, 50 or even 60 percent

capacity,” Middleton says. 

But variability of wind can pose

problems. Wind power is not classified

as base-load power because it cannot be

relied upon 24/7 to provide enough

electric power to meet member needs. 

USDA loan aids project

Wind power is among the fastest

growing forms of renewable energy in

the United States. It is also one of the

lowest-cost, non-hydro sources of

renewable power. Once a turbine is paid

for, wind is essentially free fuel that

produces no greenhouse gas emissions.

With the increasing cost of fossil fuels

and the low environmental impact of

wind turbines, wind power is “the right

thing to do,” Middleton says.

Illinois REC’s wind project was

boosted by a $1.3 million loan from

USDA Rural Development’s Utilities

Program. The wind project earned the

co-op the Wind Cooperative of the

Year honor from the U.S. Department

of Energy in 2006. 

The initial thrust for the wind

project began with the co-op’s

members. “We do annual surveys of our

members, and one question asked

whether we should explore involvement

in alternative sources of energy,”

Middleton says. “The answer was an

overwhelming ‘Yes!’”

“Our next step was to see how we

could make alternative energy sources

work for us,” Middleton continues.

“Cooperatives are good at managing

debt and have good relations with their

communities and their members; these

relations were assets that helped.”

As part of its feasibility study of

wind power, co-op representatives

attended a conference sponsored by the

National Renewable Energy

Laboratory, part of the U.S.

Department of Energy. “We discovered

that we had utility-grade wind right in

our back yard,” Middleton recalls. 

The next steps seemed to happen

simultaneously. “All of this — member

reaction to the survey, the wind

conference and available funding

resources — converged, and the result

was the Pike County Wind Turbine

Project.”

Reducing purchased

power costs

“Wind power accomplishes two

goals,” Middleton says. “First,

integrating it into the power grid means

Illinois Rural Electric Cooperative has

to buy less power. It is also causing the

co-op to look at the feasibility of power

storage, which ultimately could result in

another renewable energy project.” 

Currently, the turbine generates 1.65

megawatts of power, enough to provide

electricity to 500 homes. Wind levels in

central Illinois could support as many as

100 turbines, Middleton says, which

could add as much as $7 million to the

local tax base.

The co-op is looking at adding a few

more turbines, but Middleton says any

large project would require contracts to

sell the wind-generated power. Can it

happen? Yes, he says, but there are no

current plans to expand the co-op’s

wind project. 

The lack of transmission capacity is a

major obstacle to increasing wind

power. Utilities in the surrounding

parts of the state are “not excited about

wind farms, in part, because of the cost

of moving this new power load around,”

Middleton explains. Nonetheless, about

150 electric cooperative utilities across

the country own wind facilities or have

agreements in place to purchase wind

power. 

Another constraint to wind power is

that some of the best wind sites are

found in mountains and coastal areas,

where turbine placement can cause

scenic-impact concerns.

In Pike County, the overall

community has always been supportive

of the wind project, Middleton says.

For the most part, the co-op managed

to avoid the negative issues that

sometimes arise from constituencies

with conflicting goals. However,

initially there were some critics,

Middleton says. “The concerns focused

on possible harm to birds and the noise

issues. But those concerns did not

materialize.” 

The co-op’s wind turbine produces

less sound than does an average

household, in large part because newmodel rotors now turn much more

slowly than did rotors on older model

turbines. The slower rotational speeds

also reduce the risk to birds. 

Since the turbine was installed,

community support has been

overwhelming. “People see the turbine

up close, and that makes a difference,”

Middleton says. “They love it. We’ve

put in a small community park by it.

We don’t have picnic tables yet, but we

get families coming out to play, take

pictures — just to visit. That might be

the difference between people in cities

and rural areas.” ■

24 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

USDA provided a $1.3 million loan for this

Illinois turbine.
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 25

By Jane Livingston,

CooperationWorks!

frican-American farmers and other

rural people in Mississippi have

been overcoming hurdles in their

pursuit of prosperity for many

years. The devastation that

followed in the wake of the 2005 hurricane season

dealt them another severe blow. But within hours

of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita passing through,

people here were mobilizing not only to help

themselves, but to reach

beyond the state border

to their neighbors in

Louisiana. 

One of the most

active first responders to

the crisis was the

Mississippi Association

of Cooperatives (MAC)

and its Center for

Cooperative

Development. With a

35-year track record of

helping rural people use

the cooperative business

model as a springboard

for economic development in the nation’s poorest region,

MAC was in a good position to offer help. 

Center staff members Ben Burkett and Melbah Smith

traveled through the afflicted region, holding “Co-op 101”

trainings in mud-spattered tents in the temporary evacuee

camps, using flip boards and storytelling where no

PowerPoint could go, filling out forms with farmers using

pick-up tailgates as their desks.

Seeing results

Two years later, there are measurable results in both states.

MAC members, such as South Rankin County Farmers

Cooperative, are supplying fresh produce to farmers markets

that the Center helped

start or re-open. One of

these is in New Orleans’

Ninth Ward; the others

are in Ocean Springs and

Hattiesburg, Miss.

The Center has

also seen results from

working directly with some

of MAC's 13 members to

improve marketing

strategies. Producerowners of Indian Springs

Farmers Association in

Petal, Miss., have nearly

tripled their annual sales.

Among their buyers: two

charter schools in New

Orleans with which the coop created a business

relationship during the

past two years. 

And with the

assistance of the Center

and the Mississippi

Department of

Agriculture’s Farm-toSchool Program, the co-op

has been selling produce to Mississippi schools for two years.

Producers have realized a 35-percent increase in revenue

from their co-op as a result of this program.

Another niche targeted by Indian Springs is the Gulf

Coast casinos, which were back in operation less than a year

after being virtually wiped out by the hurricanes. The co-op

sells them tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of produce

annually.

Co-op model for outreach

One of the reasons for the Center’s consistent ability to

provide the cooperative tools of self-help to the region's

farmers and rural residents is the value given to community

Driving Development in the Delta

CO-OP DEVELOPMENT ACTION

Mississippi co-op organizations promote self-help recovery efforts following hurricanes

A

Small co-ops owned

by black farmers in

Mississippi are

successfully

marketing produce to

schools, farmers

markets, casinos and

other customers

because they are

organized into the

Mississippi

Association of

Cooperatives, which

supports a Center for

Cooperative

Development. 

continued on page 39
26 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

Editor’s note: This article is an expanded version of one that

originally appeared in CoBank’s 2006 annual report. Learn

more about Alabama Farmers Co-op at www.alafarm.com,

and Bonnie Plant Farm at www.bonnieplants.com.

f you’re a resident of rural Alabama or

even parts of Florida, Georgia and

Mississippi, you’re likely to benefit —

perhaps more than you know — from

an agricultural cooperative that was

born during the 1930s to help farmers get a tax break on

nitrogen fertilizer.

These days, you’ll find much more than fertilizer at

Alabama Farmers Cooperative (AFC), one of the largest

farmer-owned businesses in the Southeast. Since it

began 71 years ago, the federated supply and marketing

cooperative has served the region with nearly every

imaginable agricultural supply and service. 

Based in Decatur, Ala., the multifaceted company is

owned by 46 local, farmer-owned cooperatives that

represent more than 30,000 members. Originally known

as Tennessee Valley Fertilizer Cooperative, AFC

typically sees annual revenues reach more than $300

million.

Grain marketing, cotton ginning and catfish

processing are major divisions of AFC. Member co-ops

also operate 80 farm-supply retail stores that sell

everything from feed, seed, and fence supplies to garden

materials, animal health products and sporting goods for

a rising number of non-farm residents. 

Powered by its diversity, AFC is channeling income

to farmers, jobs to 2,300 people, support to related

businesses and millions of dollars into rural

communities.

“AFC and its member co-ops provide a lot of retail

outlets in the community and much-needed products

I

Alabama Farmers Co-op and its Bonnie Plant Farm play

big role in strengthening

the rural South

Spreading Seeds of Success

Bonnie Plant Farm grows 20 varieties of vegetables, 

22 types of herbs and more than two dozen different

flowers (primarily annuals), including the pansies

pictured here with co-op manager Dennis Thomas. 
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 27

and services for farmers,” says Jimmy Newby, an Athens, Ala.,

farmer whose family — through its membership in

Limestone Farmers Cooperative — has done business with

AFC since 1960. “Those benefits and services would be

sorely missed if AFC wasn’t here to provide them.”

This Southern agricultural leader has built its success in

large part by anticipating customers’ needs and developing

innovations to meet them. Perhaps no AFC division typifies

that approach more than its Bonnie Plant Farm division. 

Winning over Wal-Mart

Based in Union Springs, Ala., Bonnie Plant Farm is one of

the nation’s largest sellers of tomatoes, vegetable plants, herbs

and flowers. As a wholesale company, Bonnie Plant Farm

doesn’t sell directly to the public. Instead, the division ships

to 49 states, supplying major home and garden retailers like

Wal-Mart, Home Depot and Lowe’s.

In Union Springs alone, Bonnie Plant Farm employs 200

workers, mostly in greenhouse and delivery operations, and

generates a yearly payroll of $40 million. 

“We’re one of two major employers in this area [the other

is a chicken-processing plant] with a huge economic impact,”

says Bonnie Plant Farm manager, Dennis Thomas. “A lot of

people are counting on us to succeed.”

Bonnie Plant Farm has achieved its success in part with an

innovative inventory and delivery system for its retail buyers.

Using a process now copied by competitors, Bonnie Plant

Farm trucks its high-quality plants directly to customers’

stores, where it also stocks the products on the shelves. Only

when plant sales are recorded at the cash register by

scanning each container’s Universal Product Code is Bonnie

Plant Farm credited. 

The paperless system streamlines inventories and increases

efficiency for retailers. Most important, it creates customer

satisfaction. It’s a major reason why Wal-Mart named Bonnie

Plant Farm its Vendor of the Year in 2005 — and why the

plant wholesaler has seen its revenue soar.

Partnering for success

Today, AFC relies on a handful of lenders to finance the

operations of Bonnie Plant Farm and the co-op’s numerous

other divisions. As a long-time financial partner, CoBank

helps fund AFC’s seasonal operating needs. CoBank

specializes in financing U.S. agribusinesses, particularly

cooperatives, as well as rural communications, energy and

water systems and agricultural exports. 

A CoBank subsidiary, Farm Credit Leasing supplies

delivery trucks and greenhouse equipment for Bonnie Plant

Farm. Bank of America and Deere Credit serve as additional

AFC financial partners.

“Having multiple lenders was once unthinkable,” says

AFC’s chief financial officer, Dan Groscost. But, he adds, the

diverse banks work well together to help manage risk for

AFC’s multimillion-dollar operations.

Grandparents’ legacy

“There’s no question that our people, products and

partnerships are key to our success,” says Tommy Paulk,

AFC’s CEO since 1996.

Paulk, the fourth CEO in the co-op’s history, might also

credit his grandparents, Bonnie and Livingston Paulk. The

two established Bonnie Plant Farm in 1918 near Union

Springs, Livingston’s hometown. 

Expanding beyond a bare living of raising cotton, corn,

peanuts and hogs, the couple began producing cabbage plants

to sell to merchants during the winter months. The venture

proved successful, with the Paulks boosting their efforts by

advertising in the local newspaper. 

The business grew steadily as the couple added more fieldgrown vegetables to their sales inventory. They soon

christened their budding business, naming it after Bonnie

Paulk. The Paulks began advertising their vegetables in every

weekly paper in Alabama and in the South’s leading farm

papers.

By 1940, Bonnie Plant Farm counted about 2,000 regular

customers. It shipped to 10 Southern states besides Alabama.

Bonnie Plant Farm employs 200 permanent workers and 3,000 workers

during peak season, generating an annual payroll of $40 million in the

Union Springs, Ala., region.

continued on page 39
28 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

Are small co-ops

still viable in Ireland’s

dairy pastures? 

Small Advantages Small Advantages 
By Robert Briscoe and Michael Ward

Editor’s note: Briscoe is program director and Ward is deputy

director at the Centre for Cooperative Studies at the National

University of Ireland in Cork. This is the second of a two-part look

at dairy co-ops in Ireland. The first article appeared in the SeptOct. issue. 

“Why is a company the size of Glanbia paying farmers a lower

price than smaller co-ops that never amalgamated with anyone?” 

— Farmer quoted in the Irish Farmers’ Journal, May 21, 2005 

eware the “Grey Ones!”

The English novelist J.B. Priestley wrote a

thought-provoking tale called The Grey

Ones that told of a sinister secret society that

specialized in discouraging optimistic people.

The Grey Ones did this by explaining — in merciless detail

— why progressive ideas and hopeful dreams could never

possibly work, “human nature being what it is!” Sometimes,

we might be forgiven for suspecting that co-ops have

attracted more than their fair share of Grey Ones — those

experts who seem to delight in pointing out to us, in scornful

detail, why cooperative practices and principles are hopelessly

at odds with conventional management wisdom. 

We are told, for example, that conventional management

wisdom requires considerable economies of scale if producer

co-ops in agribusiness are to meet the needs of their

members and survive in a global economy. But consider the

quotation at the start of this article, in which a farmer

compares the performance of the biggest of Ireland’s dairy

co-ops with the performance of some of the smallest. In spite

of the conventional “wisdom,” many of the smaller dairy coops in Ireland appear to be able to pay higher milk prices to

members than some of the giants, as well as contributing

more fully to the sustainability of local communities. How is

this possible? 

Another tenet of the conventional “wisdom” is that coops, particularly smaller ones, are inevitably less flexible than

conventional firms. Co-ops, we are told, are less agile because

they are obliged to buy all of their members’ outputs,

regardless of whether or not there are markets for all of it.

However, in spite of conventional “wisdom,” Irish dairy coops of all sizes have found ways of increasing their flexibility

regardless of their size. How was this possible?

We are also told that co-ops, particularly the smaller ones,

are conservative and slow to respond to new opportunities. In

Ireland, for example, smaller agri-co-ops were criticized for

retaining retail outlets, going against conventional

management advice. However, their retail outlets continued

to generate profits and provided invaluable services as well as

jobs for rural communities. Now, many of the major co-ops

and co-op Public Limited Companies (PLC) are investing

heavily in new retail ventures. 

This article addresses the question of how is it possible for

small- to medium-size co-ops to fly in the face of

conventional management “wisdom.” It suggests that

conventional “wisdom” may not be as wise as its advocates

would have us believe. 

Multi-purpose dairy co-ops 

Irish dairy cooperatives are multi-purpose businesses.

Dairy processing is their prime activity, but they also engage

in activities such as grain handling and storage, meat

processing and the sale of farm supplies. According to the

2005 annual report of the Irish Cooperative Organization

Society (ICOS), there were 31 dairy cooperatives in Ireland,

including co-ops with holdings in PLCs. These co-ops had

88,564 members and total sales of 10.5 billion euros. They

range in size from the very small to global organizations

operating on almost every continent. 

The three largest dairy co-ops (Kerry, Glanbia and

Dairygold) account for 82 percent of the total sales of dairy

co-ops and 44 percent of the members. Medium-size co-ops

account for 14 percent of the total sales and 47 percent of the

members.

Small co-ops that process milk account for 3 percent of

the total sales and 5 percent of members. Very small co-ops

that collect milk and then sell it to larger co-ops to process

account for 1 percent of the total sales and 3 percent of

members. 

Conventional wisdom vs. common sense

In spite of such wide variations in size, the quality of

services to farmers and the milk prices they enjoy seem to be

independent of size, because many smaller co-ops are

outperforming their bigger neighbors. Smaller- and mediumsize co-ops have found a variety of innovative ways of

responding to the conventional wisdom, which advocates the

following kinds of strategies for achieving economies of scale: 

• the merger of co-ops; 

• rationalization of manufacturing facilities and services, and 

• growth through acquisitions.

Economies of scale

Over the years, experts have urged Irish co-ops to

amalgamate into a single mega-co-op, but many small dairy

cooperatives have deliberately remained small and

independent. They see this as the best way of serving their

member/users into the future. They point to what they

regard as relatively poor performance by the larger

cooperatives and the negative consequences of mergers, such

as the decline of formerly vibrant rural communities. 

Proponents of small co-ops also argue that a mix of dairy

ownership structures and scale of operation are good for the

industry because they ensure a competitive environment.

They often refer to the woeful state of dairy farming in the

United Kingdom, where more than half of dairy farmers have

left the industry since 1995, (see Felicity Lawrence’s “Why

British dairy farming is in crisis,” The Guardian, London.

Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 29

B
30 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

April 24, 2007). They also cite the nightmare condition of

the Chilean dairy industry, where conventional “wisdom” led

to a single multinational manufacturer setting the price of milk.

More recently, the Prospectus Report (2003), commissioned

in Ireland by the government and industry, argued that the

Irish dairy industry is falling behind its international

competitors and that much larger processing

units are required to shift the emphasis on to

more value-added products and investment in

research and development. The report also

recommends forming larger farms. 

“A consolidated player needs to emerge in

the medium term with a scale at which it is

processing around 70 percent of the processed milk,” said Joe

Rea, commenting in the Irish Farmers’ Journal in April 2003

on the Milk Price League (a table that compiles the prices

Ireland’s dairy co-ops pay to their members). 

It was also pointed out that even if all of Ireland’s dairy coops were to merge, the resulting “giant” would be smaller

than the biggest dairy co-ops in Europe, and far smaller than

Dairy Farmers of America and New Zealand’s Fonterra.

In spite of such recommendations, Irish co-op farmer

shareholders have been somewhat reluctant to amalgamate.

The merger in 1997 of Waterford and Avonmore Co-ops and

PLCs (to form Glanbia) was accepted only after members

were promised substantial financial benefits to sweeten the

deal. 

The case against merger

Merger is resisted for a number of reasons. Many farmers

have a sense of loyalty to their co-op that goes far beyond

mere commercial considerations. They take pride in their coop’s achievements and in the foresight of their ancestors.

They also worry about the detrimental impact of merger on

local employment and the sustainability of neighboring

communities. 

Above all, they believe that healthy competition between

several independent cooperatives leads to efficiencies, ensures

farmer influence and enhances member services and the milk

price paid to farmers. 

The presence of cooperatives side by side with PLCs is an

added complication in attempts at amalgamation. The PLCs

tend to regard acquisitions, particularly overseas acquisitions,

and in-house diversification as more important strategies for

growth than amalgamating with other local co-ops. The

PLCs are less concerned with primary milk processing and

do not see their major profits coming from this source.

Is ‘small’ manageable and cost effective? 

Many Irish farmers are sceptical about the efficiency and

economy argument for large-scale milk processing. They

point to medium-size societies — such as Town of Monaghan

Co-op in Ulster or Newmarket in Munster — which

regularly outperform the largest co-ops and PLCs on milk

price and service to farmers.

“The performance of Newmarket [a medium-sized co-op]

is remarkable,” said Joe Rea, commenting in the April 2003

Irish Farmers’ Journal. “With only 8 million gallons of owned

quota, it is a pace-setter.” Newmarket is virtually an allcheese manufacturer, which was a very difficult product to

sell last year. “Monaghan tops the Price League,” Rea

continued. “It has performed very well over

the last three months, paying impressive

spring bonuses.”

The efficiency of small, well-managed

cooperatives operating in niche markets has

international parallels. In New Zealand, Tatua

Co-op and Westland Milk Products, with less

than 5 percent of the milk supply, outperform the giant

Fonterra on milk price.

Co-op leaders in this sector maintain that small- to

medium-size operations can enjoy unique competitive

advantages of their own. These include better

communications with farmer-suppliers, staff flexibility,

efficient hands-on management, greater motivation and

identification. In the words of one manager: “With hands-on

management, we can gradually keep equipment and

technology up to date without having to embark on major

investment programmes. Also, we can often spot bargains or

acquire pieces of equipment at rock-bottom prices from

dairies or bigger co-op branches that are closing down and, if

necessary, put it into storage.”

Yet another manager said: “As outfits get big, real control

is lost ...around here, the labor force has been reduced

gradually — with the advent of new technology — by simply

not replacing staff. So there is no need for big, expensive

rationalization programs, which destroy morale and alienate

the local community.”

Farm efficiency or economies of scale?

In an interview in the Irish Farmers’ Journal (June 24,

2004), the chairman of Newmarket Co-op argued that all coops need to be proactive to encourage their suppliers to stay

in milk production. A big part of this effort involves

promoting increased financial management skills among dairy

farmers. In other words, greater efficiency at the farm level is

a key issue. 

“Some people talk about increasing scale as the panacea to

all ills; here it can be clearly seen that those farms that

reduced costs considerably did not do it by increasing scale,

but by cutting out the cost of infertility, machinery and

buildings — and by increasing labor productivity,” said Arndt

Reil, who compiled a cost-comparison study for the 2004

European Dairy Conference in Wales (as reported in the Irish

Farmers’ Journal, July 17, 2004). “Reducing costs on the farm

is one of the main ways farmers can influence how much

money ends up in their pockets,” the same article concluded. 

Competitive advantages of being Irish!

Many co-op leaders, especially those from small and
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 31

medium-sized societies, argue that it is not legitimate to

compare the Irish dairy experience with that of New Zealand

or mainland Europe. Irish dairy farmers have distinctive

competitive advantages when compared with their

counterparts in Denmark and Holland. Milk can be produced

at lower cost than in mainland Europe, given the fact that

Irish cattle are free to roam fields and dine on fresh grass for

most of the year. 

One respondent argued that an Irish supplier with a

55,000-gallon milk quota could generate as much income as a

Danish farmer with twice that amount of quota. They assert

that Irish co-ops should look more closely at their own

achievements and successes of the last quarter century and

build on these achievements rather than always looking

abroad at situations which are not comparable. 

Enjoying the best of both worlds

The above arguments may sound reasonable, but do they

really compensate for the loss of economies of scale? In fact,

small cooperatives have also found tangible ways of enjoying

the advantages of scale while remaining small. Almost all of

these strategies involve cooperating with other co-ops in ways

such as these:

• Processing together — Carbery Creameries Ltd. in West

Cork is a widely admired federated co-op. This secondlevel milk-processing cooperative is owned by four smallto medium-size cooperatives: Drinagh, Bandon, Lisavaird

and Barryroe co-ops. Respectively, they hold 39, 22.6, 20

and 18.4 percent of Carbery shares. It processes all of the

milk (74 million gallons) collected by the four co-ops in

their own trucks, which retain the individual name and

logos of each co-op. Carbery is a leading cheese

manufacturer (Dubliner Cheese is its best known brand)

and it has some involvement in food ingredients and

alcohol production. It operates its own dedicated research

and development facility. The individual co-ops that own

Carbery continue to operate independently. They operate

their own farm stores, provide services for their own

members, and each decides on the milk price it pays its own

members. 

Despite this, or perhaps because of it, they typically pay

the top milk prices in the country. Eric Donald,

commenting in the Irish Farmers’ Journal in 2006, said:

“For the second year in a row, Bandon has emerged to pay

the highest price in the country... the second and third

highest milk prices in the country last year were also paid in

West Cork by Barryroe and Lisavaird, respectively.

Wexford creameries disrupted the West Cork four-in-a-row

record by placing just ahead of Drinagh Co-op.” 

To the surprise of the pundits, Glanbia topped the milk

price league in October 2006, with one of the Carbery coops a close second, underlining the importance for farmers

of the strong competition from the smaller co-ops.

• Marketing together — The Irish Dairy Board (IDB) is a

second-level federated cooperative owned by Irish dairy coops. With subsidiaries in the United Kingdom, Germany,

Belgium, France and the United States, IDB’s key task is

marketing Ireland’s dairy products internationally. It has

proved particularly useful for small- to medium-size co-ops,

enabling them to access export markets. Inevitably, to some

Many Irish dairy cooperatives are highly diversified, some also marketing livestock feed and other farm supplies, operating

retail outlets and even selling real estate. Photo courtesy Connacht Gold
32 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

extent it duplicates the marketing activities of the larger coop/PLCs, but it still enjoys strong support from the big coops. With a sales turnover in 2004 of 2 billion euros, IDB

has enabled small-scale Irish co-ops to enjoy the benefits of

large-scale operation. 

Its key competitive advantage is the Kerrygold brand, a

trusted brand for quality butter in about 60 countries. The

Kerrygold brand accounts for 47 per-cent of the IDB’s total

sales, with a third of Kerrygold butter being sold in

Germany. There is also considerable potential for using the

Kerrygold brand to promote other consumer products in

Europe. In recent years, IDB has been highly profitable,

with pre-tax profits in 2003 reaching a record level of 36.5

million euros. 

• Purchasing together — Irish dairy co-ops have traditionally

been involved in operating stores, with the aim of reducing

the costs of farm inputs and supplies. The larger co-ops and

PLCs have enjoyed favourable terms with conventional

wholesalers. These deals were not always available to

smaller co-ops. To address this problem, CEOs of smaller

co-ops met in 1996 and set up Associated Trading Co-op

(ATC), an association of co-ops that would coordinate the

purchasing of a wide range of store goods, with the aim of

improving the profit margins and competitiveness of their

members.

Today, 20 of the smaller cooperatives are members of

ATC, which has an annual turnover of 30 million euros. It

is a low-overhead agency, without warehouses, inventory or

delivery trucks and is managed by a part-time coordinator,

assisted by representatives of the membership. It pools the

orders of member co-ops and identifies and negotiates with

potential suppliers, which are visited to ensure quality

standards. 

Members are required to purchase the amounts they

ordered from the selected sources, and goods are delivered

direct to the co-ops by the suppliers. ATC has also

developed its own brand name, Co-op Source, and

suppliers pack a growing range of products in Co-op

Source packaging. The aim is to build an attractive brand,

which guarantees quality products at reasonable prices.

Different approaches to rationalization,

restructuring

While cooperatives are often slow to merge, many of

them, particularly the bigger ones, have embarked on

rationalization. For example, Dairygold has divested itself of

a number of unprofitable operations and reduced its labor

force by one quarter. Glanbia PLC has a turnover of about 2

billion euros and is 55 percent owned by Glanbia Co-op. It

has almost completed a major restructuring of its food

operations and is now growing businesses in cheese-based

nutritional ingredients and consumer foods in the United

States. Its emphasis on health-based functionality is being

supported by a new 15-million-pound research and

development innovation center in Kilkenny.

On a more modest scale, many smaller cooperatives are

rationalizing their milk transport collection divisions by

outsourcing, or by making arrangements with neighboring

co-ops. Connacht Gold is providing a 2-cent-per-gallon

bonus for farmers who invest in new higher capacity milk

bulk tanks on their farms. This will allow the co-op to move

to an every-third-day milk collection schedule. Two or three

co-op drivers will work a 24-hour shift with the same truck. 

This is a very different way of rationalizing. Unlike the

usual approach, this is a rationalization strategy that: a)

benefits farmer members by decreasing their co-op’s costs,

and b) protects jobs in local communities.

Who benefits from acquisitions? 

Acquisition (particularly overseas acquisition) is a favored

route to growth for the giant co-op PLCs, and has led to

considerable diversification. Kerry Foods, for example, is a

very successful business, but fewer and fewer of its activities

relate to the needs of local dairy farmers. In 2004, Kerry

Foods spent 665 million euros on eight acquisitions, and it

recently set up a Bioscience Division, thus extending the

group’s food ingredients platform to bio-ingredient and

pharma-ingredient applications.

This opens up a new range of customers for Kerry in the

pharmaceutical industry. During the past 10 years, Kerry has

invested an average of 4.5 million euros per year on the

continuing development of this site. In spite of its scale of

operation, Kerry is being pressured by major U.K. retailers to

relocate some of this Kerry-based production to England for

the convenience of Tesco and Wal-Mart.

Impact of different types of acquisition

The above approaches to growth through acquisition

ultimately export Irish funds and jobs overseas and divert

substantial profits to non-farmer investors, all of which is

likely, in the long run, to have a detrimental effect on the

survival of small-scale farmers and rural communities in

Ireland. 

The kind of acquisitions favored by small- and mediumsize co-ops are often in marked contrast to those of the giant

co-ops. Instead of hemorrhaging local resources, they build

local communities and expand cooperative membership. 

For example, Town of Monaghan Co-op, a medium-size

co-op, has grown by acquiring the privately-owned

Leckpatrick milk powder plant in Artigarvan, County Tyrone,

and now processes milk in Northern Ireland for the first

time. At its Artigarvan plant, it also produces a range of

hydrolysed wheat and rice flours with various applications for

end users in the bakery, baby foods, breakfast cereals and

high-energy foods sectors.

Informal cooperation — and being kind to

giants!

Another complaint of the “Grey Ones” is that co-ops lack

flexibility because they have to buy all the output of member
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 33

farmers, regardless of the co-op’s ability to process all of it at

a profit. While the smaller co-ops are proud of their

independence, they resolve the flexibility problem by working

closely with nearby larger co-ops and PLCs. 

For example, there is considerable cooperation between

Irish co-ops and PLCs for milk collection and the use of

processing facilities at both off-peak and high-peak seasons.

Consider Newmarket Co-op in North Cork, which purchases

milk from neighboring co-ops and PLCs to supply its

established cheese markets and keep its plant running

smoothly and at a high capacity. In turn, the other dairies are

happy to supply milk rather than invest in a higher capacity

plant, which they would use only for a short period each year. 

Glanbia PLC, in which Glanbia Cooperative Society is

majority shareholder, collects about 60 percent of the

Mullinahone Cooperative’s milk quota of 1.7 million gallons.

All of the milk testing for Mullinahone is done in the Glanbia

laboratories. However, Mullinahone processes all of its own

milk.

Irish co-ops also cooperate informally on EU milk quota

issues. For example, in the winter of 2003, a small number of

Kerry, Lakeland and Arrabawn dairy farmers transferred part

of their milk supplies to Connacht Gold and gained access to

its large ‘restructuring’ milk pool. The move was supported

by all the co-ops involved. 

Connacht Gold took in the dual supplies because it had

satisfied demand for its ‘restructuring’ quota among its

existing suppliers. In most cases, the suppliers transferred

5,000 to 10,000 gallons of their milk quota to Connacht

Gold, which benefited from an increased milk supply. Kerry,

Lakeland and Arrabawn co-ops were happy to support their

own members’ gaining access to additional quota because this

increased family farm income.

Other advantages of being small

Among the other advantages of running small operations

are: responsiveness on health issues, product traceability,

maintaining closer relationships with farmer-members and

the ability to respond more rapidly to member and customer

needs.

Smaller co-ops maintain that they are better situated to

build consumer confidence on traceability and health issues.

This, they say, is because they are much more in touch with

their farmer suppliers. Stronger links with suppliers and

awareness of their needs, together with the flexibility of a

small-scale operation, mean that small co-ops can react

swiftly to help farmers deal with farming difficulties. 

What conventional firm would act like this small

cooperative?

The following excerpt from the 2002 North Cork

Cooperative Society annual report underscores what

proponents see as the small co-op advantage. 

“The adverse weather conditions last summer created

serious income pressure on our members, which was keenly

felt at the farm level. As an independent cooperative, we are

deeply committed to providing appropriate support for our

members, and we swiftly moved to cushion their problems by

supporting the milk price throughout

the year. 

“Your Society also introduced a

further series of schemes aimed at

easing the serious financial strain on

members, which saw feed prices

reduced. These extraordinary measures

were taken to help members through a

particularly difficult season and were

funded from co-op reserves.”

Cooperative outsourcing

Many smaller co-ops are

beneficiaries of outsourcing from the

larger co-ops and PLCs. Although operating on strictly

business lines, cooperative outsourcing is also an indication of

cooperation between cooperatives. 

Dairygold Co-op has chosen Town of Monaghan

Cooperative to produce its Sno brand of yogurt products.

Town of Monaghan already produces Spelga Yogurt (which is

the market leader in Northern Ireland) for Dale Farm Ltd.,

in addition to its own Mona brand. 

It is not only the larger co-ops that are engaged in

outsourcing. Some of the smaller ones have been able to use

this approach to enhance their efficiency. 

Thwarting the pessimists!

Small can be efficient as well as beautiful! 

We have seen how small co-ops can address scale issues in

production, marketing and purchasing by observing the

cooperative principle of Cooperation between Cooperatives.

A compilation of effective federations, joint ventures, secondlevel co-ops and intelligent mutual aid can enhance the

effectiveness of small and large alike, and thwart the cynical

pessimism of the Grey Ones! 

Editor’s note: for references used for this article, please send an

e-mail to: Briscoe@ucc.ie, or Michael.ward@ucc.ie. ■

Connacht Gold’s diversified operations are represented here by livestock feeds

and a milk tanker truck. Photos courtesy Connacht Gold 
34 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

SDA in September announced the selection

of 162 recipients in 40 states and Puerto Rico

to receive $22.7 million through the ValueAdded Producer Grant program.

“These grants support farm families in

rural America by helping them market their commodities and

increase their financial returns,” said then-Agriculture

Secretary Mike Johanns. “I'm also pleased that some of these

funds will help develop alternative fuels from renewable

energy sources as part of President Bush's comprehensive

national energy policy.” 

Approximately one-third of the grants, 56, will go to

recipients who requested $50,000 or less in federal assistance. 

One of the largest awards went to Sunsweet Growers in

California, where USDA Rural Development State Director

Ben Higgins presented the co-op with a $300,000 check to

assist the Yuba City-based cooperative in marketing a new

“light” version of its “PlumSmart” juice drink. Sunsweet is a

grower-owned marketing cooperative of more than 400

members, well known for dried-plum products. The

cooperative represents more than one third of the dried plum

market worldwide. 

“In today’s global marketplace, California’s agricultural

cooperatives understand that they need to stay on the cutting

edge of innovation to remain competitive,” Higgins said.

“This grant will help improve the competitiveness of

Sunsweet Growers by supporting innovative new production

and marketing strategies.”

Since October was national Cooperative Month, Higgins

noted that California is home to more than 160 cooperatives

with gross sales of more than $7 billion annually, and that

farmer-owned co-ops nationally had sales of $126 billion in

2006. USDA Rural Development has invested more than

$9.3 million in California cooperatives alone since 2001.

Other examples of the VAPG awards include:

• Quality Dairy Goat Producers Cooperative of Chilton,

Wis., was selected to receive $37,500 to help it market

quality goat milk to high-end cheese companies. 

• Krouse Ranch Inc., Grants Pass, Ore., will receive an award

of $17,650 to develop a feasibility study to process and

market cut and dressed beef through local farmer-chef

connection programs. 

• MinnErgy LLC, Winona, Minn., was selected for an award

of $300,000 to fund the initial startup for an ethanol plant. 

• Orlicek Farm, Stuttgart, Ark., was selected to receive

$98,500 to determine the feasibility of marketing biofuels

from a facility in Arkansas. 

Value-Added Producer Grants may be used for planning

activities or to provide working capital to market value-added

agricultural products and farm-based renewable energy

projects. A value-added product is created when a producer

takes an agricultural commodity, such as milk or vegetables,

and processes or prepares it in a way that increases its value

to consumers. 

USDA Rural Development has committed more than

$158 million to value-added agricultural investments since

2001. 

Below is a list of cooperatives that received VAPGs in

2007. Many producer-owned LLCs that operate on co-op

principles were also among the grant recipients. A complete

list of grant recipients is available at USDA Rural

Development's Web site: http://www.rurdev.usda.gov. ■

U

USDA providing $22.7 million in 

Value-Added Producer Grants 

. 

Co-op Recipients of 2007 VAPGs STATE AMOUNT

Olive Growers Council of California California $288,485

Sunsweet Growers, Inc. California $300,000

1Soy Missouri $68,000

Quality Goat Dairy Producers Wisconsin $37,500

Oregon Woodland Management and

Sales Cooperative Oregon $147,085

Tasteco Cooperative Inc. California $296,500

Ozark Quality Hardwoods Coop Missouri $145,000

Blue Ridge Forest Cooperative Inc. Virginia $300,000

Agri-Mark/Cabot Creamery Inc. Vermont $149,000

High Desert Milk Inc. Idaho $300,000

Mercer Landmark Ohio $300,000

Carolina Dairy Producers N. Carolina $45,000

Burnett Dairy Wisconsin $300,000

Pecos Valley Biomass Co-op Inc. New Mexico $50,000

Colorado Cooperative Council Colorado $70,000

VALUE-ADDED CORNER
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2006 35

GROWMARK sets sales,

income records

GROWMARK had record sales of

$4.4 billion and record net income of

$151 million, before patronage and

dividends, for fiscal 2006-07 (which

ended Aug. 31). The federated co-op

will also be returning record amounts of

patronage to its member co-ops. 

“Our wholesale businesses that

provide seed, plant food, crop

protection products, grain systems and

energy products and services all

produced strong results,” Vice

President of Finance Jeff Solberg said.

More than $105 million in patronage

refunds will be returned to

GROWMARK member cooperatives.

“This is the first time in nearly three

decades that we have distributed

patronage refunds from all of our major

product divisions. It will be the largest

amount of cash returned to members in

the history of the GROWMARK

System, and is a tribute to the unity of

the System,” Solberg said.

Highlights of the co-ops’ recordbreaking year include: 

• Energy Division — This unit posted

its fourth consecutive record for gross

income: $131 million, or $31 million

more than in 2006. Refined fuels

volume climbed, driven by strong

growth in sales of premium Dieselex

Gold products. Propane sales also set

a record, and GROWMARK sales of

FS-branded lubricant products, as

well as the United and Archer brands,

tripled. 

• Agronomy/Seed Divisions — Record

sales were achieved in the Agronomy

Division, with expanded corn acreage

leading to higher levels of plant food

sales. Despite a 10-percent drop in

soybean sales, overall seed sales in

2007 were 22 percent higher than a

year ago and triple the level of 2000.

Total seed corn sales were up 52

percent. 

• Facility Planning and Supply Division

— Strong demand for grain storage

tripled grain systems sales in just

three years; volume through the coop’s Tank and Truck Center showed

an eighth consecutive year of sales

growth. 

• Grain Division — Total Grain

Management (TGM), a partnership

between GROWMARK, EffinghamClay Service Co. and Wabash Valley

Service Co., had its first successful

year, marketing nearly 50 million

bushels of grain from 21 locations. 

Study: CWT boosted milk 

checks 75 cents per HW 

The return this year on dairy

farmers’ investment in Cooperatives

Working Together (CWT) will be at

least 75 cents per hundredweight

(HW), according to an independent

economic analysis of the voluntary dairy

farmer-funded and managed self-help

program. 

The analysis was performed by Dr.

Scott Brown of the University of

Missouri, a nationally-known farm

policy expert who is regularly called on

by the U.S. Congress to assess

agricultural economic issues. Brown

evaluated the impact of CWT’s 2007

herd retirement and export assistance

program activities during the first half

of 2007, in addition to reviewing the

effects of CWT’s past activities.

Meanwhile, CWT officials say it is

getting commitments from its members

to continue their support for the

program in 2008. In June, the CWT

Program Committee voted to renew the

program in 2008 to maintain the

current 10 cent assessment level.

Current membership in CWT includes

cooperatives and farmers producing

69.1 percent of the nation’s milk supply. 

“Not a single cooperative that has

been part of CWT this year has

notified me that they won’t be part of

the program in 2008,” said Jerry Kozak,

president and CEO of the National

Milk Producers Federation, which

manages CWT. Even with the record

high farm prices of this summer,

“producers recognize that we will need

CWT in the future to help stabilize

prices,” he added. 

Earlier this year, CWT’s fourth herd

retirement program removed 53,000

cows, representing 1 billion pounds of

milk production. In the first half of

2007, CWT’s export assistance program

facilitated the sale of 930 million

pounds (milk equivalent) of butter,

milkfat and cheese. CWT has also

raised its target price benchmarks from

$14 to $16 per HW. 

AGP rejects second

takeover bid

An investor group pursuing a hostile

NEWSLINE

Send items to: dan.campbell@wdc.USDA.gov

Growmark Chairman Dan Kelley (left)

and CEO Bill Davisson.
36 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

takeover bid of Ag Processing Inc. has

made a second bid for the Omaha,

Neb.-based soybean processing co-op,

upping its offer from $850 million to

$910 million. But AGP’s board has

again rejected the unsolicited offer from

Ag Processors Alliance (APA) LLC.

“Contrary to APA’s representations,

our members have overwhelmingly

expressed support for the AGP board’s

decision in rejecting this hostile

takeover attempt,” Mike Maranell,

AGP’s senior vice president for

corporate and member relations, said in

response to the offer. “In fact, AGP

members’ strong and consistent

message to the board of directors has

been that their company — a valuable

piece of the cooperative system — is

not for sale.”

AGP is the world’s largest

cooperative soybean processor, a

vegetable oil refiner, and a participant

in the biofuels industry. AGP is owned

by 203 local and six regional co-ops

representing 250,000 farmers in 16

states.

Green Power EMC now serves

1.6 million Georgia households

Georgia’s first renewable energy

program, Green Power Electric

Membership Corporation (EMC),

recently welcomed Okefenoke REMC,

in Nahunta, Ga., as its newest member,

bringing to 36 the total number of

participating electric cooperatives

throughout Georgia. This adds another

33,000 consumers to Green Power

EMC, a nonprofit cooperative founded

in 2001 that offers green energy to

more than 1.6 million Georgia

households.

“Based on the resources available to

us, Georgia ranks among the top five in

the nation, from a cooperative

standpoint, in terms of renewable

energy programs,” says Green Power

President/CEO Michael Whiteside.

Landfill gas, poultry litter and lowimpact hydro projects are keys to Green

Power EMC's success, he notes. “And

we continue to look for other

resources.”

Green Power EMC plans to

purchase 20 megawatts of electricity

from the first poultry litter-to-energy

operation in Georgia. The electricity

will be provided by Earth Resources

Inc., which is constructing a chicken

litter-to-electricity plant near

Carnesville, about 70 miles northeast of

Atlanta. Green Power EMC also

operates Sun Power for Schools, the

first statewide school program to

showcase the benefits of solar energy.

PCCA to pay members

$25.7 million

Cash payments of $25.7 million to

members were announced during the

54th annual stockholders meeting of

Plains Cotton Cooperative Association

(PCCA) in Lubbock, Texas. The

payments consist of $12.1 million in

cash dividends, $4.8 million in stock

retirements and $8.8 million in

retirement of per-unit capital retains.

“Fiscal 2007 was another very

successful year, with record

performance in several areas,” reported

PCCA President and CEO Wally

Darneille. “Although drought hurt

cotton production prospects in several

areas, we still reported net margins of

$20.5 million from ongoing

operations.” 

Among the year’s highlights were

record direct export sales, record net

margins in the Marketing Division,

record cotton receipts from PCCA

members in Taylor, Texas, Northern

Oklahoma and Kansas, and a record

number of textile mill customers. 

“The combination of successful

marketing efforts, a third consecutive

record year in our TELMARK

subsidiary and some extraordinary gains

led to record net margins of $5.6

million in the Marketing Division,”

Darneille said. PCCA’s Pool Divisions

reported combined net margins of

almost $14 million. 

PCCA’s Warehouse Divisions

reported good earnings despite intense

drought in portions of Texas and

Oklahoma that resulted in lower yields

on irrigated land and a significant

number of abandoned dry-land acres.

However, thanks to bumper crops in

northern Oklahoma and Kansas, the

Oklahoma Cotton Cooperative

Association warehouse facilities received

the third largest crop in the division’s

history, with earnings of $3.7 million. 

Adverse weather resulted in a smaller

than average crop in the rolling plains

area of Texas, but the Rolling Plains

Cooperative Compress facility reported

earnings of $2.1 million.

Fiscal 2007 was a challenging year

for PCCA’s Textile Division as it

continued the transition to increased

production of value-added fabric styles

while facing price pressures from

denim imports. The division reported a

net allocable loss of $2.6 million at

year-end, but working capital increased

$3.5 million, to $31.4 million, and cash

flow from operations made a $1.4

million turnaround. 

Walnut growers may sue

Diamond over payments 

A group of California walnut

growers have hired a Modesto attorney

to press claims that Diamond Foods

Inc. has paid them millions of dollars

below market prices for their crop.

Diamond converted from a cooperative

in 2005.

According to a report in the Stockton

Record, the Growers Committee for a

PCCA’s latest annual report.
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2006 37

Fair Price from Diamond estimates

Diamond underpaid growers $23

million for 2005 walnuts and $29

million for 2006 walnuts. That’s about 8

cents per pound less for their 2005 crop

and 10 cents a pound less for the 2006

crop. The newspaper quotes some of

the unhappy growers as saying they

believe the company is underpaying

them to pay for expensive advertising

for its Emerald nut line. 

Sam Keiper, Diamond vice president

of corporate affairs, told the Record that

the claims are unfounded and that the

growers pursuing the lawsuit represent

a small minority of the company’s

growers. Other published reports

indicate that the company is for sale.

NCGA to help detect

organic food fraud 

The National Cooperative Grocers

Association (NCGA) is partnering with

Hanover Co-op Food Stores, PCC

Natural Markets and Unified Grocers

on a pilot program exploring the

implementation of the organic

industry's first system-wide, retailerbased organic fraud detection and

prevention program. 

As part of this initiative, NCGA has

contracted with the nonprofit

International Organic Accreditation

Service (IOAS) to determine

appropriate methods retailers can use to

limit the incidence of fraudulently

traded organic products and to increase

the chances of early detection when it

takes place within the retail supply

chain. 

“Our program will not change how

organic products are certified,” says

Robynn Shrader, CEO of NCGA, a

business services cooperative for 110

U.S. consumer-owned food co-ops.

“Rather, we're seeking to add a very

critical safety checkpoint in the supply

chain that will empower retailers and

provide peace of mind for organic

customers.”

IOAS will conduct testing measures

with NCGA grocers and suppliers over

the coming months. Based on the

pilot's findings, a recommended

retailer-based fraud prevention program

will be developed, which will be offered

not only to NCGA's members, but all

organic retailers nationwide and

worldwide as early as mid-2008. 

In another area, NCGA is calling on

its member co-ops’ suppliers and

vendors nationwide to raise funds for

family farmers who produce organic

crops in the Upper Midwest and were

impacted by the floods that devastated

portions of the area in August. NCGA

will match the first $50,000 raised for

family farmers. For more information,

visit: www.sowtheseedsfund.org. 

Small and minority producer

co-ops receive USDA grants 

Acting Agriculture Secretary Chuck

Conner has announced the awarding of

recipients in seven states for $1.2

million through the Small Minority

Producer Grant program. “The grants

will help small, minority producers

develop and market new products,”

Conner said. “USDA is providing

technical assistance for projects ranging

from renewable energy development to

livestock production.” 

For example, Heritage Farm

Cooperative in Auburn, Wash., will

receive $150,000 for technical assistance

to produce sunflower oil seeds and nonester renewable fuel and animal feed. In

Rapid City, S.D., the InterTribal Bison

The new Sterlena Pride Dairy Cooperative has struck a deal to purchase

the former Sterling Milk Co. dairy plant in Wauseon, Ohio, which it plans to

reopen in November. Transferring with the plant is a local celebrity: this 14-

foot high, fiberglass Holstein named Sterlena. There were fears that the

faux cow, which often makes guest appearances at county fairs and

parades, might be put out to pasture during the ownership shuffle. But the

co-op has assured the community: “She’s staying put.” Now if only they

can find a feed ration that will improve her milk average. 

Photo courtesy the Toledo Blade 
38 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

Cooperative will use a $175,000

technical assistance grant to help 57

tribes understand the dynamics and best

practices in formulating improvement

protocols in the bison industry. 

Small Minority Producer Grants are

provided to cooperatives or associations

of cooperatives to assist small minority

producers with 75 percent minority

memberships and/or governing boards.

Funding of individual recipients will be

contingent upon their meeting the

conditions of the grant agreement. For

a list of receipients and more

information on this and other USDA

Rural Development programs, visit:

www.rurdev.usda.gov. 

Dakota Beef buys Kansas co-op 

Hurt by drought and grain storage

problems, Quinter, Kansas-based

Midwest Cooperative members have

voted overwhelmingly to sell their

operations to Dakota Beef, the nation’s

biggest organic beef producer. The

Hays, Kan., Daily News reports that coop members voted 300 to 23 to sell the

cooperative’s 12 elevators to Dakota

Beef, which has an organic beef

processing plant in Howard, S.D. 

Midwest Manager Rob Thompson

told the Daily News he was a bit

surprised by the overwhelming vote,

and said people turned out from

throughout the cooperative’s trade area.

In addition to Quinter, the co-op has

elevators in Collyer, Park, Grainfield,

WaKeeney, Ogallah, Voda, Bogue, Hill

City, Morland, Penokee and Studley.

The $7.6 million price is on target with

an appraisal required by CoBank, the

co-op’s lender. 

POET, DOE in agreement

for cellulosic ethanol project 

POET, formerly known as Broin,

and the U.S. Department of Energy

(DOE) have signed a cooperative

agreement for a commercial cellulosic

ethanol project in Emmetsburg, Iowa.

The agreement finalizes the first phase

of a DOE award that was announced in

February and will govern all aspects of

the project, leading up to construction.

■

Five cooperative business leaders will be recognized at the annual

Cooperative Hall of Fame dinner and induction ceremony at Washington’s

National Press Club on April 30, an event that annually draws a standing-roomonly crowd. 

The Hall of Fame, the cooperative community’s highest honor, recognizes those

who have made “heroic” contributions to cooperative enterprise. “The profiles of

these individuals reflect lifetimes of achievement as business and community

leaders, public policy advisors, innovators, and advocates for cooperative

development, both here and around the world,” says Elizabeth Bailey, executive

director of the Cooperative Development Foundation, which administers the Hall

of Fame.

The 2008 inductees are: 

Gary Hanman — Hanman retired in 2005 as president and CEO of Dairy Farmers of

America. His career in co-op dairy marketing spanned 42 years and involved

many leadership positions. He is credited with the visionary leadership that

brought about the merger of four diverse cooperatives to create DFA in 1998.

Today, DFA is the nation’s largest dairy cooperative, representing more than

20,000 dairy farmers and marketing more than one-third of the nation’s milk

supply. 

Terry Lewis — Vice President for Cooperative Development with NCB, Lewis is an

expert on cooperative law, with a deep belief in cooperatives. She has been a

passionate advocate for co-op housing as the best model for affordable home

ownership. With her legal and tax expertise, Lewis has devoted her career to

helping shape public policy related to cooperative housing development and has

been a key player in efforts to protect cooperative housing from unfavorable tax

treatment. 

Douglas D. Sims — Sims retired as CEO of CoBank in 2006, where he played a

prominent role in helping the Farm Credit System (FCS) survive the downturn in

the farm economy in the early 1980s. Sims is also credited with playing a key role

in the subsequent reorganization of the FCS, including the creation of CoBank in

1989. Sims devoted his career to promoting the cooperative form of enterprise in

the national and international arena and to encouraging co-op leaders to

embrace change. 

Walden Swanson and Kate Sumberg — Swanson and Sumberg are respected for

their vision, innovation and dynamic leadership as business consultants to the

global cooperative community. Their influence extends across co-op sectors, with

their most extensive work being with food co-ops. Among their many

accomplishments was the creation of CoopMetrics, a financial benchmarking and

data warehouse services cooperative. Its mission is to empower cooperatives

and community development organizations through the use of technology and

management best practices. ■

Co-op Hall of Fame picks

five “heroic” inductees
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2006 39

production tax credits, in most cases they would need to form

an LLC subsidiary. “For a lot of co-op boards, it is a struggle

when they have to wrestle with broadening their business

model — and rightfully so; they should struggle with it. This

is something totally different than adding grain storage or a

fertilizer department.” 

Be prepared to negotiate some bumps in the road, says

Arends. “You will probably have some rocky roads to travel

— you always do in any industry, especially a new one. So far,

though, Minwind has been doing what it is supposed to.”

Looking back on the past seven years, Willers says: “It’s

been a lot work, but it has also been a fun community

project. We have had fantastic community support and have

benefited from community leaders and board members who

are truly visionary.” 

But does all that wind ever create problems for Minnesota

farmers?

“Sure, but we can laugh now when the wind breaks off our

corn, because at least we are making some money from the

wind.” ■

Harvest the wind

continued from page 8

In 1975, Alabama Farmers Co-op bought Bonnie Plant Farm.

Business grew rapidly through the 1980s as Bonnie Plant

Farm added more greenhouses and plant-delivering trucks.

The next generation steps up

“As mass market retailers began to expand into the home

garden trade by opening garden centers, we suddenly saw an

opportunity to increase sales at an even greater pace,” Stan

Cope, another grandson of Livingston and Bonnie Paulk,

remembered a few years later. 

To prepare for what was to be tremendous growth in the

1990s, Bonnie Plant Farm increased its distribution stations

in other states, hired more salesmen and constructed more

greenhouses. By 2005, the company counted 35 stations in 25

states. Its 293 route salespeople delivered its vegetable and

flower plants to more than 8,000 accounts nationwide.

Agriculture’s cyclical nature, however, soon took a turn for

the worse. In 2006, AFC and its members faced a year-long

drought, low yields, rising interest rates, high input prices

and increasing pessimism about the prospects for a farmerfriendly Farm Bill in the next Congress. 

A disappointed Paulk would report to members that AFC

had experienced its “worst financial performance in several

years.” Even thriving Bonnie Plant Farm felt the hardships of

2006. Despite record sales that year, the division ended up

earning less than in 2005, hit hard by growing expenses for

supplies, raw material costs, propane and fuel.

Paulk vowed that “a financial turnaround must be job one

for us in 2007.” By spring, the recovery was taking place. 

Hope for the future

“Our members are incredibly loyal to this system, and

their unwavering support has enabled us to have the best start

we’ve seen for a long time,” Paulk reported this spring. “All

divisions have exceeded expectations through five months of

operations and are on a pace to produce record earnings once

again for [fiscal year] 2007.”

The downturn of 2006 would not have surprised Paulk’s

grandmother, Bonnie, nor would it have discouraged her. In

her 1940 history of Bonnie Plant Farms, she recalled the

troubles that Southern farmers as well as her family’s business

had seen, and explained her outlook. 

“Although we have not made any money, we have made a

good living,” she noted. “Our expenses are heavy, increasing

as business grows... We started out just as everyone does, with

the idea of making some money. We are still living and

working in hopes.”

It’s not likely that Bonnie Paulk foresaw the heights that

Bonnie Plant Farm would reach. But 67 years later, her

determination to survive still rings true, not just for her

grandson and the Alabama company he manages, but for

rural cooperatives the nation over. ■

Spreading Seeds of Success

continued from page 27

organizing as a model for outreach. This, and the legendary

abilities of such co-op luminaries as Burkett and Smith, has

attracted many allies to their work. 

For example, they are working with Alcorn State

University’s Co-op Extension Small Farm Development

Center to help producers complete a marketing plan to

increase production at a local processing facility. They are

collaborating with the Mississippi Development Authority

Energy Division and USDA on constructing a 20-unit

housing cooperative in Holmes County.

They are also working with a faith-based nonprofit, Saint

Margaret’s Nursing Home, to develop an elder-care workers'

co-op in New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward. The goal is to

provide top-quality cleaning, laundry and food services to the

low-income elderly who live there, and also to help the

neighborhood.

MAC and the Mississippi Center for Cooperatives

continue to inspire and assist rural Mississippians seeking to

improve their own lives and those of others, in the deepest

traditions of cooperative enterprise. Even in the face of the

severest challenges, the vision has held steady. 

By uniting as farm families to create cooperatives, then by

joining those co-ops into associations, they have built the

capacity to make a difference on a regional scale. In so doing,

they have positioned themselves to become powerful catalysts

for change. ■

Driving Development in the Delta

continued from page 25
40 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

50 Years Ago...

From the November and December 1957 issues of News for Farmer

Cooperatives

Co-op Field Days Promote Better Farming

Field Days at Potato City in August this year offered many

attractions. Each year Pennsylvania Cooperative Potato

Growers Inc., Harrisburg, sponsors the event — an excellent

example of co-op help toward better farming. Field Day

guests toured the experimental plots of the co-op’s potato

research farm, where 5,200 varieties of

potatoes grow under the direction of

Dr. E. L. Nixon.

For the first time, the association

arranged a complete demonstration of

harvesting methods and improved

machinery and equipment for

Pennsylvania growers and growers

from neighboring states. 

The machinery included new

harvesters, pickup loaders — both selfpropelled and tractor drawn — as well as tractor mounted

diggers and loaders.

For its soil demonstration, the co-op showed how to lay

out a diversion terrace, used to make experimental plots

productive and manageable. Plant food experiments stressed a

practical farmer approach to fertilizing small grains and

potatoes. 

Some of the women competed in a recipe contest while

teenagers took part in a fishing contest. Naval Air Station

from Niagara Falls brought in helicopters for an air show. 

Candy Shows Build Member Interest (cover

article)

Things came to a boil in the Pacific Northwest this fall at

the Homemaker Holiday Candy Shows. Three sponsors

backed these gatherings: Homemakers Department, Pacific

Supply Cooperative, Walla Walla, Wash., with Mrs. Helen

King at the helm; local associates affiliated with the regional;

and Western Beet Sugar Producers Inc. of Salt Lake City,

Utah, with Mrs. Ruby Garrett (officially known as Nancy

Haven, home economist), representing it and demonstrating

the candy making.

These adult leader training shows, with a lot of advance

planning by Mrs. King and help from the local women, drew

large crowds to the co-ops. The good effect of these free

shows spread. Some people in the audience took what they

learned about beet-sugar candy making back to other local

groups. These might be 4-H Clubs, home economics clubs,

churches, Boy Scouts, Camp Fire Girls, women’s clubs, school

teachers, Granges, Farm Bureaus and others.

The operation required detailed

planning, and Mrs. King had it all

down on suggestion sheets she sent

out to chairmen of the local women’s

groups. These sheets made up an

Advance Kit and included suggestions

for preparation of the show with ideas

to make it of the greatest possible

value to the local co-op.

Response to these shows was

excellent. In most cases, two or three

times more people came than were expected, and local

managers were enthusiastic about the results. Walt Steele,

manager of the Polk County Farmers Co-op, Rickreall, Ore.,

wanted to know, “How soon can you send another

Homemaker Show our way? This was the easiest promotional

meeting we ever did. Everything was outlined in the advance

kit and was ready for us, so everyone knew just what to do.”

“No more could have been done, than was done, for me or

my company, Western Beet Sugar Producers Inc., to make a

successful joint program,” Nancy Haven said, 

30 Years Ago...

From the November and December 1977 issues of Farmer

Cooperatives

More Women’s Involvement Resulting From Jobs

Well Done

“If the house were on fire, a woman would not stop to say:

‘This part is my husband’s — I’ll go over and put out the fire

in my area.’ No, she would pitch in to save what they could

together. And that’s why women should be involved in our

cooperatives: To pitch in together for the survival of the

family farm.”

This analogy was given by Dorothy Shaner, farm wife from

Kingfisher, Okla., who participated in the National Institute

on Cooperative Education (NICE) to get ideas to take back to

the cooperative that serves the Shaner family farm.

PAGE FROM THE PAST

From the archives of Rural Cooperatives

and its predecessor magazines
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 41

Cooperative leaders wanting to

encourage involvement of women in

cooperatives attended a special

workshop on the subject. Tools and

techniques for developing leadership

were offered to the 35 men and

women enrolled. 

If any of the rural women felt

remotely unnecessary to

cooperatives, the thought was

quickly dispelled at the various sessions on women’s

involvement. Women have the opportunity to be an

influential force in cooperatives, particularly those 60,000 to

75,000 who are wives of managers and directors, said Owen

Halberg, AIC president, keynoter of the women’s workshop.

Some formal women’s activities date back to 1916, reported

Joann Fulcher of Farmland Industries. But there is some way

to go, she added. We are still struggling with many managers,

members and women who are unwilling to admit women to

total participation. Fulcher ended her talk by quoting a

woman co-op member who said: “We don’t want to run

things. We just want to help make things run.”

Most Iowa Co-ops Have Revolvement Plans

Nearly two-thirds of the respondents in a survey of Iowa

cooperatives have some kind of revolving fund, reports the

Iowa Institute of Cooperation. The Institute conducted a

survey as part of its work on proposed state legislation dealing

with equity retirements. The Institute sent out 450 survey

forms to members and received 172 completed returns, a

reasonably accurate rate of return. 

Among the more important questions was one asking for

the dollar amounts paid under its

revolvement plan to estates of

retired members. Some 135

respondents answered affirmatively,

reporting that they paid a total of

$1,427,768. Following are some

other highlights of the survey:

• Sixty-one percent of those

responding have some kind of

revolving fund.

• Only 39 percent have a program

for converting allocations into

preferred stock.

• Fifty-two percent have a chronological (specific year)

requirement plan for equity.

• But only 26 percent use a retirement plan based on a

percentage of all outstanding stock.

• Affirmative responses to the question of revolving member

equity during the past three years ranged from 54 to 58

percent.

• A whopping 79 percent of the respondents have programs

that pay out estates of deceased members, with 65 percent

picking up all estates.

• Only 15 percent have plans providing for the redemption of

stock of retired persons.

• Only 15 percent redeem the equity of persons who move

away from the area.

• Sixty-two percent said they paid out 20 percent of the coop’s earnings in cash, while 40 percent paid more or less

than 20 percent.

10 Years Ago...

From the November/December 1997 issue of Rural Cooperatives

Merger Creates Europe’s Largest Dairy Co-op 

Two Dutch dairy cooperatives in northeast Holland have

merged to form the largest dairy cooperative in that country

and in the European Community. Friesland Dairy Foods and

Coberco merged to form De Zeveb Provincian. The co-op

represents 15,000 dairy farmers and has an 11-billion-pound

milk supply. Its manufacturing subsidiary, Friesland Coberco

Dairy Foods, has annual sales volume of $5.4 billion. Both

cooperative partners specialize in cheese manufacturing.

Unlike its American counterparts,

which draw their financing through

members, Friesland allows nonmember investment and earnings

from its operations. 

Volume Climbs at Southern

States

For the fourth consecutive

year, Southern States Cooperative

set a sales record in 1997 with

more than $1.21 billion in sales.

Southern States, headquartered in Richmond, Va., operates in

the Mid-Atlantic states. Sales volume was up from $1.12

billion in 1996. Net savings of $27.5 million was just short of

the fiscal 1996 record. 

The cooperative added

$14.4 million to its net worth,

which reached $177.1 million after

revolving all 1975 patronage refund

allocations. Since 1988, Southern

States’ total assets have grown from

$273 million to $409 million, net

worth from $118 million to $177

million, and working capital from

$72 million to $109 million. 

CF Industries, Southern

States’ interregional cooperative fertilizer source, paid a

record $13.1 million in patronage, up from $12.7 million in

1996. Half was paid in cash and the other half as preferred

stock. Southern States’ board voted to pay patronage refunds

totaling $17.5 million. ■
42 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

Information appearing in Rural Cooperatives magazine during calendar year 2007 has been indexed to help you find

past articles. Articles are indexed by issue and page. Back issues can be found on-line at:

www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/pub/openmag.htm. For hard copies, e-mail: dan.campbell@wdc.usda.gov.

TITLE FEATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Issue—Page 

Above the Belt

Cotton Belt shifts northward into state known for fields of grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 4

AGP rejects hostile takeover bid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 35

Almond roots run deep through human historyJan./Feb. 12 

Back from the Brink

Support of members, employees and suppliers vital to Southern States’ turn-around effort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 10

Billion-Pound Baby

‘High-octane’ almond orchards fuel sustained growth as Blue Diamond expands global

market reach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 8

Biorefinery projects awarded $385 million . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 17

Branding for Success

Trademark law, product certifications important to many co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 12

California growers champion Tuscan olives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 28

Certifying a reputation: Virginia-Carolinas growers brand their peanuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 14

Changing of the Guard

Market changes lead to higher level of farmer collaboration in England . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 4

CHS: Make ethanol-blended fuel manatory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 20

Co-op Hall of Fame picks five “heroic” inductees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 38

Co-op people weather the storm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 8

Co-op salvages hope amid ruins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 6

CooperationWorks! draws top names to training progam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 27

CooperationWorks! goes co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 11

Co-ops Focus Collective Action

Business structure still helping producers address power disparity in the marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 33

Core business principles guide Heartland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 33

Corn Condos for Sale

Growth and innovation key to Heartland Co-op’s success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 32

Emerald Pastures

Ireland’s dairy co-ops adopt range of strategies in response to changing markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 14

Energy leadership development urgently needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 7

Evolving technology may generate profit from biodiesel glycerin glut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 30

Exporting the U.S. cooperative model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 32

Farm Bill supports cellulosic ethanol development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 18

Farmer co-ops report record net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 25

Farmer co-ops set net income record; gross business volume hits $126.5 billion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 9

FCS boots lending to young, beginning and small producers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 35

Financing co-op energy opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 20

From Forest to Ocean

Diverse Washington co-ops show business model flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 24

Global 300 list reveals world’s largest co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 28

Global 300 selection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 30

Harvesting the Prairie Wind

Minnesota farmers structure wind business

to keep more energy dollars close to home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 4

Housecleaning co-op members see income, benefits rise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 24

Iowa Wind Farms Supported by USDA Renewable Energy Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 9

Kentucky co-op feeds the Queen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 23

King’s Ransom

Ohio tree farmers’ co-op seeks better markets, prices for ‘King of Pines’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 14

Mica, Abernathy, Ditsch named top co-op communicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 29

Minnesota Farmers Structure Wind Business to keep more dollars at home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 5

Miracle on the Bayou

How one Louisiona parish is resurfacing from disaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 20

Mississippi produce co-op supplying casino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 33

Missouri credit union collaborates with value-added cooperative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 19

NCFC: Commission recommendation would destroy farmers’ ability to compete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 13

Outside the Box

Community-owned department stores an alternative to big-box chain stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 22

Predevelopment work nets higher royalties for landowners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 14

2007 Article Index
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 43

Producer ownership of ethanol a major plus 

for rural America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 19

Record-breaking sales in ’06 to help Sunkist weather

severe crop freeze . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 11

Renewable fuels industry rife with opportunity for co-ops . . . . . Jan./Feb. 18

Renewable x 2

Corn Plus taps wind power to operate ethanol plant . . . . . Nov./Dec. 17

Rolling with the Punches

Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers Co-op developing

own products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 26

SDWG identity-preserved grains add value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 21

Shouldering the risk

Strategy for risk management essential to moving 

cellulosic technology forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 14

SkillsUSA prepares students for trade, technical careers . . . . March/April 30

Small Advantages

Are small co-ops still viable in Ireland’s dairy pastures? . . . Nov./Dec. 28

Small farmers learn ways at conference to add value . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 36

Spreading Seeds of Success

Alabama Farmers Co-op and its Bonnie Plant Farm play big role

in strengthening the rural South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 26

Stepping up to the plate

Basin Electric’s multi-pronged strategy to reduce 

greenhouse gases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 20

The Big Chill

Sunkist growers scramble to save fruit; co-op adjusts 

marketing strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 8

Thinking Outside the Carton

100 years ago, Fruit Growers Supply founders made investments 

that still bolster citrus industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 4

Turning Over a New Leaf

End of tobacco program, rising foreign competition thrust 

burley co-op into new role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 24

Upstate Niagara Goes Uptown

Team effort provides financing for modern, $35 million 

dairy plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 12

USDA awards $415,000 for early-warning broadcasts . . . . . . . . May/June 39

USDA programs support co-op development, expansion . . . . . May/June 26

USDA providing $210 million for rural broadband, telecom . . . Jan./Feb. 37

When a Co-op Dies

Long-time gin closes doors, one more casualty of California’s 

shrinking cotton industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 4

Where Credit is Due

Russian farm credit officials study American 

finance model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 30

Wind Power Energizing Rural America

Increasing share of U.S. wind energy sector

held by community and producer groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 10

Winds of Change

China looks to co-ops to help farmers duplicate success 

of industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 22

Wired for Success

Broadband co-op helping southern Virginia attract new 

information technology jobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 18

WIREC Conference set for March 4-6 in D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 19

Wisconsin farmers, small businesses benefiting from new 

health-care co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 28

Worker-owned businesses share ideas during North Carolina 

conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 31

Worker-owned/ESOPs can help preserve business 

in rural America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 28

ZEN-NOH: Japan’s federated ag co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 31

Magazine Departments

CO-OP DEVELOPMENT ACTION

Cooperation, c’est magnifique!

U.S. co-op centers take a closer look at Quebec’s 

phenomenal co-op growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 18

Driving Development in the Delta

Mississippi co-op organizations promote self-help 

recovery efforts following hurricanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 25

Forging family-to-family food chains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 8

Future of Local Food . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 22

New Hybrid on Great Plains

Increased consumer access, education paying off for 

local producers & shoppers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 26

Nurturing Caregiver Co-ops

NCDF helps finance critical need for in-home rural 

healthcare services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 32

COMMENTARY

Co-op structure aids longevity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 2

Co-ops Fueling Green Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 2

Co-op’s role in renewable energy economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 2

Heed the Call . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 2

Senate vote sends strong message supporting farmer 

cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 2

Working for the long term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 2

Focus On...

High Desert Milk Inc.

Burley, Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 17

In the Spotlight

Dixie Watts Reaves

Associate Professor, Agricultural and Applied Economics, 

Virginia Tech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 16

Jim Erickson

Southern States Cooperative, Richmond, Va. . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 15

Welch’s Daniel Dillon swaps crops, but stays in agriculture . . . . Jan./Feb. 17

Legal Corner

Antitrust report a wake-up call for co-ops to defend 

marketing rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 12

Management Tip

Four high-priority responsibilities for effective co-op 

management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 23

Newsline

Web based calculator helps control animal-housing energy. . . . . Jan./Feb. 34

TFC: Animal health ‘in the bag’

PCCA’s Darneille to lead International Cotton Association

Record sales year for Accelerated Genetics

Humboldt Creamery launches organic milk

Florida’s Natural introduces organic juice products

Pilgrim’s Pride to pay $1.1 billion for Gold Kist

GROWMARK to market BMI soy-based biodiesel

Iowa, Minn., co-op elevators merging

Lukiewski to lead Welch’s

ITC finds dumping injuries U.S. lemon juice industry

Cass-Clay, AMPI propose merger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 26

USDA announces $90 million in electric loans in 10 states

Indiana co-ops to merge

LOL sales top $7.3 billion

MMPA returns $1.6 million in cash patronage to members

Southern States board elects new chairman

Missouri Farmers Union marks centennial anniversary

Grain co-op specialist Charles Hunley dies

NMPF seeks data on ethanol impact on dairy economics

USDA marketing grants available

American Sugar Refining acquires Redpath Sugar

UK merger would create world’s largest consumer co-op

CoBank’s record earnings support $193 million patronage . . . . May/June 36

UPG forms joint venture to operate potato dehydrator

AMPI earnings bounce back

Montana ranchers form Organic Producers Co-op

Alto Dairy to close liquid feed division

Sunsweet marks 90th anniversary

DFA to idle Lovington, N.M., cheese plant

Co-op master’s degree application deadline

Foremost has $12.5 million loss; closes juice plant; hires COO
44 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

CHS distributes record $258 million to members

MMPA elects new president

NH to host conference

CountryMark expanding refinery; rebranding Midwest 

fuel stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 33

NW pear shippers to combine marketing

GROWMARK to acquire energy firm; teams with FB on risk management

Co-op development class

AMPI acquires Cass-Clay

Study: ethanol not main factor in higher food costs

A&N Electric Co-op to acquire Delmarva Power

FCS boost lending to young, beginning and small producers

CHS building three pipeline terminals

Small farmers learn ways at conference to add value

AGP rejects hostile takeover bid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 35

Retiring dairy farmers concerned by production costs, succession issues

DFA closing Calif. cheese plant

Oregon electric co-op to pursue ocean wave power

New book examines utility co-op’s struggles

Cooperative Foundation grants supporting co-op education

CHS acquires DDG business; sells Brazilian soybean shares

NMPF partners with USDA on animal identification system

Organic Valley distribution center to boost economy of southwest Wisc.

Green Plains Renewable Energy, Great Lakes Co-op to merge

East Iowa Central to merge with Members Mutual Oil

Minnesota Soybean Processors in agreement with Bunge

Tillamook selects new CEO

Co-op strategies to be focus at Farmer Co-op Conference

GROWMARK sets sales, income records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 35

Study: CWT boosted milk checks 75 cents per HW

AGP rejects second takeover bid

Green Power EMC now serves 1.6 million Georgia households

PCCA to pay members $25.7 million

Walnut growers to sue Diamond over payments

NCGA to help detect organic food fraud 

Utility Co-op Connection

Advanced technology enables Illinois electric co-op to tap 

into wind power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 23

Georgia alternative energy plant to be fueled by wood 

& poultry waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 24

The Right Thing to Do

Electric co-ops pursuing cutting-edge renewable 

energy, conservation projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 23

Value-Added Corner

Olive Oil Council expanding markets with help of VAPG . . . . . July/Aug. 26

South Dakota: great faces, great places — and great 

value-added opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 20

USDA providing $22.7 million in Value-Added 

Producer Grants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 34

SUBJECTS

Banking/Farm Credit

FCS boots lending to young, beginning and small producers . . July/Aug. 35

Where Credit is Due

Russian farm credit officials study American finance model May/June 30

Financing co-op energy opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 20

Broadband

USDA providing $210 million for rural broadband, telecom . . . Jan./Feb. 37

Wired for Success

Broadband co-op helping southern Virginia attract new

information technology jobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 18

Communications

Four high-priority responsibilities for effective co-op

management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 23

Mica, Abernathy, Ditsch named top co-op communicators .. . . . July/Aug. 29

Consumer Co-ops

Forging family-to-family food chains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 8

Future of Local Food . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 22

Outside the Box

Community-owned department stores an alternative

to big-box chain stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 22

Co-op Development

Cooperation, c’est magnifique!

U.S. co-op centers take a closer look at Quebec’s 

phenomenal co-op growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 18

CooperationWorks! goes co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 11

Driving Development in the Delta

Mississippi co-op organizations promote self-help

recovery efforts following hurricanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 25

Exporting the U.S. cooperative model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 32

Forging family-to-family food chains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 8

From Forest to Ocean

Diverse Washington co-ops show business model flexibility May/June 24

Future of Local Food . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 22

Kentucky co-op feeds the Queen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 23

King’s Ransom

Ohio tree farmers seek better prices for King of Pines . . . . . Jan./Feb. 14

Miracle on the Bayou

How one Louisiona parish is resurfacing from disaster . . March/April 20

New Hybrid on Great Plains

Increased consumer access, education paying off for local 

producers & shoppers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 26

Nurturing Caregiver Co-ops

NCDF helps finance critical need for in-home rural 

healthcare services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 32

Wired for Success

Broadband co-op helping southern Virginia attract 

new information technology jobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 18

Co-op Principles/Advantages

Co-ops Focus Collective Action

Business structure still helping producers address power 

disparity in the marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 33

Core business principles guide Heartland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 33

Emerald Pastures

Ireland’s dairy co-ops adopt range of strategies in 

response to changing markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 14

Thinking Outside the Carton

100 years ago, Fruit Growers Supply founders made 

investments that still bolster citrus industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 4

Cotton

Above the Belt

Cotton Belt shifts northward into state known for 

fields of grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 4

When a Co-op Dies

Long-time gin closes doors, one more casualty of California’s 

shrinking cotton industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 4

Credit Unions

Cooperation, c’est magnifique!

U.S. co-op centers take a closer look at Quebec’s 

phenomenal co-op growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 18

Missouri credit union collaborates with value-added 

cooperative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 19

Dairy

Emerald Pastures

Ireland’s dairy co-ops adopt range of strategies in 

response to changing markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 14

High Desert Milk Inc.

Burley, Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 17

Small Advantages

Are small co-ops still viable in Ireland’s dairy pastures? . . . Nov./Dec. 28

Upstate Niagara Goes Uptown
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 45

Team effort provides financing for modern, 

$35 million dairy plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 12

Disaster Recovery

Co-op people weather the storm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 8

Co-op salvages hope amid ruins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 6

Driving Development in the Delta

Mississippi co-op organizations promote self-help 

recovery efforts following hurricanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 25

Miracle on the Bayou

How one Louisiana parish is resurfacing from disaster . . March/April 20

The Big Chill

Sunkist growers scramble to save fruit; co-op adjusts 

marketing strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 8

USDA awards $415,000 for early-warning broadcasts . . . . . . . . May/June 39

Education

Dixie Watts Reaves

Associate Professor, Agricultural and Applied 

Economics, Virginia Tech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 16

Iowa Wind Farms Supported by USDA Renewable 

Energy Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 9

SkillsUSA prepares students for trade, technical careers . . . . March/April 30

Farm Supply, Agronomy & Service

Back from the Brink

Support of members, employees and suppliers vital 

to Southern States’ turn-around effort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 10

Co-op salvages hope amid ruins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 6

Farmer co-ops report record net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 25

Farmer co-ops set net income record; gross business 

volume hits $126.5 billion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 9

Jim Erickson

Southern States Cooperative, Richmond, Va. . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 15

Spreading Seeds of Success

Alabama Farmers Co-op and its Bonnie Plant Farm play 

big role in strengthening the rural South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 26

Thinking Outside the Carton

100 years ago, Fruit Growers Supply founders made 

investments that still bolster citrus industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 4

ZEN-NOH: Japan’s federated ag co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 31

Fishery

From Forest to Ocean

Diverse Washington co-ops show business model 

flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 24

Miracle on the Bayou

How one Louisiona parish is resurfacing from disaster . . March/April 20

Forestry

From Forest to Ocean

Diverse Washington co-ops show business model 

flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 24

King’s Ransom

Ohio tree farmers’ co-op seeks better markets, prices 

for ‘King of Pines’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 14

Fruits, Nuts, Vegetables

Almond roots run deep through human history . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 12 

Billion-Pound Baby

‘High-octane’ almond orchards fuel sustained growth as 

Blue Diamond expands global market reach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 8

California growers champion Tuscan olives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 28

Certifying a reputation: Virginia-Carolinas growers 

brand their peanuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 14

Mississippi produce co-op supplying casino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 33

Olive Oil Council expanding markets with help of VAPG . . . . . July/Aug. 26

Record-breaking sales in ’06 to help Sunkist weather 

severe crop freeze . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 11

The Big Chill

Sunkist growers scramble to save fruit; co-op adjusts 

marketing strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 8

Thinking Outside the Carton

100 years ago, Fruit Growers Supply founders made 

investments that still bolster citrus industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 4

Welch’s Daniel Dillon swaps crops, but stays in agriculture . . . . Jan./Feb. 17

Grains & Oilseeds

Co-op salvages hope amid ruins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 6

Core business principles guide Heartland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 33

Corn Condos for Sale

Growth and innovation key to Heartland Co-op’s success . Sept./Oct. 32

Farmer co-ops set net income record; gross business 

volume hits $126.5 billion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 9

Producer ownership of ethanol a major plus for rural 

America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 19

SDWG identity-preserved grains add value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 21

Health & Home Care

Housecleaning co-op members see income, benefits rise . . . March/April 24

Nurturing Caregiver Co-ops

NCDF helps finance critical need for in-home rural 

healthcare services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 32

Wisconsin farmers, small businesses benefiting from new 

health-care co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 28

International

Changing of the Guard

Market changes lead to higher level of farmer 

collaboration in England . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 4

Cooperation, c’est magnifique!

U.S. co-op centers take a closer look at Quebec’s 

phenomenal co-op growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 18

Emerald Pastures

Ireland’s dairy co-ops adopt range of strategies 

in response to changing markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 14

Exporting the U.S. cooperative model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 32

Global 300 list reveals world’s largest co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 28

Global 300 selection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 30

Small Advantages

Are small co-ops still viable in Ireland’s dairy pastures? . . . Nov./Dec. 28

Where Credit is Due

Russian farm credit officials study American model . . . . . . May/June 30

Winds of Change

China looks to co-ops to help farmers duplicate success 

of industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 22

ZEN-NOH: Japan’s federated ag co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 31

Legislative and Legal

Antitrust report a wake-up call for co-ops to defend 

marketing rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 12

Farm Bill supports cellulosic ethanol development . . . . . . . . . . May/June 18

NCFC: Commission recommendation would destroy 

farmers’ ability to compete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 13

Livestock & Poultry

Kentucky co-op feeds the Queen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 23

South Dakota: great faces, great places — and great 

value-added opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 20

Marketing

Above the Belt

Cotton Belt shifts northward into state known 

for fields of grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 4

Billion-Pound Baby

‘High-octane’ almond orchards fuel sustained growth 

as Blue Diamond expands global market reach . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 8

Branding for Success

Trademark law, product certifications important to 

many co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 12

Certifying a reputation: Virginia-Carolinas growers 

brand their peanuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 14

Changing of the Guard

Market changes lead to higher level of farmer 
46 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

collaboration in England . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 4

Farmer co-ops report record net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 25

Financing co-op energy opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 20

Mississippi produce co-op supplying casino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 33

Olive Oil Council expanding markets with help of VAPG . . . . . July/Aug. 26

Record-breaking sales in ’06 to help Sunkist weather 

severe crop freeze . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 11

Renewable fuels industry rife with opportunity for co-ops . . . . . Jan./Feb. 18

Small Advantages

Are small co-ops still viable in Ireland’s dairy pastures? . . . Nov./Dec. 28

Spreading Seeds of Success

Alabama Farmers Co-op and its Bonnie Plant Farm 

play big role in strengthening the rural South . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 26

When a Co-op Dies

Long-time gin closes doors, one more casualty of 

California’s shrinking cotton industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 4

Member Relations

Four high-priority responsibilities for effective co-op 

management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 23

Mergers

Corn Condos for Sale

Growth and innovation key to Heartland’s success . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 32

Minority Co-ops

Driving Development in the Delta

Mississippi co-op organizations promote self-help 

recovery efforts following hurricanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 25

Housecleaning co-op members see income, benefits rise . . . March/April 24

Miracle on the Bayou

How one Louisiona parish is resurfacing from disaster . . March/April 20

Mississippi produce co-op supplying casino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 33

Renewable Energy

Advanced technology enables Illinois electric co-op to 

tap into wind power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 23

Biorefinery projects awarded $385 million . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 17

CHS: Make ethanol-blended fuel manatory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 20

Energy leadership development urgently needed . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 7

Evolving technology may generate profit from biodiesel 

glycerin glut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 30

Farm Bill supports cellulosic ethanol development . . . . . . . . . . May/June 18

Georgia alternative energy plant to be fueled by wood & 

poultry waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 24

Harvesting the Prairie Wind

Minnesota farmers structure wind business to keep 

more energy dollars close to home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 4

Iowa Wind Farms Supported by USDA Renewable

Energy Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 9

Predevelopment work nets higher royalties for landowners . . . Nov./Dec. 14

Producer ownership of ethanol a major plus for rural America . May/June 19

Renewable fuels industry rife with opportunity for co-ops . . . . . Jan./Feb. 18

Renewable x 2

Corn Plus taps wind power to operate ethanol plant . . . . . Nov./Dec. 17

Shouldering the risk

Strategy for risk management essential to moving 

cellulosic technology forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 14

Stepping up to the plate

Basin Electric’s multi-pronged strategy to reduce 

greenhouse gases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 20

The Right Thing to Do

Electric co-ops pursuing cutting-edge renewable 

energy, conservation projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 23

Wind Power Energizing Rural America

Increasing share of U.S. wind energy sector 

held by community and producer groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 10

WIREC Conference set for March 4-6 in D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 19

Soybeans

AGP rejects hostile takeover bid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 35

Evolving technology may generate profit from biodiesel 

glycerin glut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 30

South Dakota: great faces, great places – and great 

value-added opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 20

Statistics

Farmer co-ops report record net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 25

Farmer co-ops set net income record; gross business 

volume hits $126.5 billion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 9

Global 300 list reveals world’s largest co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 28

Global 300 selection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 30

Tobacco

Rolling with the Punches

Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers Co-op developing 

own products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 26

Turning Over a New Leaf

End of tobacco program, rising foreign competition 

thrust burley co-op into new role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 24

Trade 

Winds of Change

China looks to co-ops to help farmers duplicate 

success of industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 22

Workers-Owned Co-ops

Worker-owned businesses share ideas during 

North Carolina conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 31

Worker-owned/ESOPs can help preserve business 

in rural America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 28

AUTHORS

Borst, Alan

Wind Power Energizing Rural America

Increasing share of U.S. wind energy sector

held by community and producer groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 10

Briscoe, Robert

Small Advantages

Are small co-ops still viable in Ireland’s dairy pastures? . . . Nov./Dec. 28

Campbell, Dan

Billion-Pound Baby

‘High-octane’ almond orchards fuel sustained growth 

as Blue Diamond expands global market reach . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 8

Co-op structure aids longevity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 2

Harvesting the Prairie Wind

Minnesota farmers structure wind business

to keep more energy dollars close to home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 4

Heed the Call . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 2

Predevelopment work nets higher royalties for landowners . . . Nov./Dec. 14

Producer ownership of ethanol a major plus for rural America . May/June 19

Renewable x 2

Corn Plus taps wind power to operate ethanol plant . . . . . Nov./Dec. 17

Thinking Outside the Carton

100 years ago, Fruit Growers Supply founders made 

investments that still bolster citrus industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 4

Wired for Success

Broadband co-op helping southern Virginia 

attract new information technology jobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 18

Chesnick, David

Global 300 list reveals world’s largest co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 28

Crooks, Anthony

Evolving technology may generate profit from 

biodiesel glycerin glut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 30

Shouldering the risk

Strategy for risk management essential to moving 

cellulosic technology forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 14
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2007 47

Daughrity, Patricia

Welch’s Daniel Dillon swaps crops, but stays in agriculture . . . . Jan./Feb. 17

Dunn, John

Winds of Change

China looks to co-ops to help farmers duplicate 

success of industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 22

English, Glenn

Co-ops Fueling Green Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 2

Erickson, Jim

Back from the Brink

Support of members, employees and suppliers vital 

to Southern States’ turn-around effort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 10

Frederick, Donald A.

Antitrust report a wake-up call for co-ops to defend 

marketing rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 12

Gray, Thomas W.

Co-ops Focus Collective Action

Business structure still helping producers address 

power disparity in the marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 33

Johanns, Mike

Co-op’s role in renewable energy economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 2

Letson, Perry

Where Credit is Due

Russian farm credit officials study American finance 

model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 30

Liebrand, Carolyn

Global 300 list reveals world’s largest co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 28

Livingston, Jane

Driving Development in the Delta

Mississippi co-op organizations promote self-help 

recovery efforts following hurricanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 25

Future of Local Food . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 22

Miracle on the Bayou

How one Louisiona parish is resurfacing from disaster . . March/April 20

New Hybrid on Great Plains

Increased consumer access, education paying off 

for local producers & shoppers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 26

Outside the Box

Community-owned department stores an alternative 

to big-box chain stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 22

Lykins, Ashley

King’s Ransom

Ohio tree farmers’ co-op seeks better markets, prices 

for ‘King of Pines’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 14

Mayberry, Anne

Advanced technology enables Illinois electric co-op to tap 

into wind power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 23

Georgia alternative energy plant to be fueled by wood 

& poultry waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 24

The Right Thing to Do

Electric co-ops pursuing cutting-edge renewable 

energy, conservation projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 23

Merlo, Catherine

When a Co-op Dies

Long-time gin closes doors, one more casualty of 

California’s shrinking cotton industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 4

Miller, Patricia

The Big Chill

Sunkist growers scramble to save fruit; co-op adjusts 

marketing strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 8

Peltier, Jean-Mari

Senate vote sends strong message supporting farmer 

cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 2

Reynolds, Bruce

Branding for Success

Trademark law, product certifications important 

to many co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 12

Worker-owned/ESOPs can help preserve business 

in rural America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 28

Schofer, Dan

From Forest to Ocean

Diverse Washington co-ops show business model 

flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 24

South Dakota: great faces, great places — and great 

value-added opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 20

Thompson, Stephen

Above the Belt

Cotton Belt shifts northward into state known 

for fields of grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March/April 4

Co-op people weather the storm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 8

Co-op salvages hope amid ruins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July/Aug. 6

Corn Condos for Sale

Growth and innovation key to Heartland Co-op’s 

success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 32

Stepping up to the plate

Basin Electric’s multi-pronged strategy to 

reduce greenhouse gases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nov./Dec. 20

Todd, Anne

Housecleaning co-op members see income, benefits rise . . . March/April 24

Olive Oil Council expanding markets with help of VAPG . . . . . July/Aug. 26

SkillsUSA prepares students for trade, technical careers . . . . March/April 30

Turning Over a New Leaf

End of tobacco program, rising foreign 

competition thrust burley co-op into new role . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 24

Wisconsin farmers, small businesses benefiting from 

new health-care co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 28

Wadsworth, James

Four high-priority responsibilities for effective 

co-op management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May/June 23

Ward, Michael

Emerald Pastures

Ireland’s dairy co-ops adopt range of strategies in 

response to changing markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sept./Oct. 14

Small Advantages

Are small co-ops still viable in Ireland’s dairy pastures? . . . Nov./Dec. 28

Lee-Woolf, Charlotte

Changing of the Guard

Market changes lead to higher level of farmer 

collaboration in England . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jan./Feb. 4
48 November/December 2007 / Rural Cooperatives

United States

Department of Agriculture

Washington, DC 20250

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for private use, $300

NOTICE:

❏ Check here to stop receiving this publication,

and mail this sheet to the address below.

❏ NEW ADDRESS. Send mailing label

on this page and changes to:

USDA/Rural Business–Cooperative Service

Stop 0705

Washington, D. C. 20250-3255

Periodicals Postage Paid

U.S. Department of Agriculture