Rural

COOPERATIVES COOPERATIVES

USDA / Rural Development November/December 2008

R e w a r d s o f L o c a l O w n e r s h i p 

Page 4
he future for rural America is a bright one,

studded with new economic opportunities.

Many of those opportunities stem from the

rapid development of renewable energy and

other value-added products from basic

agricultural materials, using both proven and

innovative, cutting-edge technologies. 

While we have seen a significant increase in research,

development and production of value-added products in

recent years, the best is yet to come. New concepts are

evolving at a rapidly escalating pace. Promising new

technologies are on the drawing board, while others are just in

the conceptual stage. 

But the reality is that all will require investment capital.

America’s cooperatives have a unique opportunity to play a

significant role in developing this growing economic sector. 

In the energy arena — because of site selection and

feedstock requirements — wind, solar, ethanol, biodiesel and

geothermal are primarily rural resources. Expansion of this

sector offers the opportunity to harvest an increasing amount

of energy from renewable, inexhaustible sources. 

Vast stretches of the American rural landscape are ripe for

solar projects. Wind energy is emerging as a potentially

significant source of electricity in much of the country.

Biofuels derived from corn and soybeans (and coming soon

from cellulosic sources, such as switchgrass) augment energy

refined from petroleum. There is no question that renewable

sources of power will continue to play an expanding role in

America’s energy picture for generations to come.

Other exciting value-added opportunities are developing as

well, ranging from agri-tourism to production of foodstuffs

that are in growing demand by consumers.

A good example of an investor-owned entity is the

Plymouth Energy Ethanol Plant and Plymouth Oil in Merrill,

Iowa. Now under construction, the ethanol plant will soon

produce 50 million gallons of ethanol from corn each year.

The plant has more than 300 local investors, mostly farmers. 

Located near the ethanol plant is Plymouth Oil, which will

use byproducts from ethanol production to manufacture about

80 tons of corn oil per day for human consumption. It will

also produce feedstock for cattle. Most of the corn will come

from fields within 60 miles of the two plants. The oil plant

was financed with a bank loan guaranteed by USDA Rural

Development. 

As consumer demand grows for high-value products, such

as energy and processed food, America’s cooperatives must

serve not just as an outlet for production, but as vehicles to

channel investments into worthwhile projects. In order to

fully capitalize on the new demand, the traditional cooperative

model is being complemented by other concepts, such as

“new-generation” cooperatives which provide greater liquidity

through tradable delivery rights. These co-ops also promote

formation of partnerships with outside entities and other

provisions that enable greater outside investment, along with

transparency, liquidity, transferability of ownership interest

and equal appreciation of asset value. 

Where should rural Americans turn for the capital needed

to buy into these opportunities? An obvious investment source

for agricultural producers is their farm equity, which now

exceeds $2 trillion. By leveraging the value of their land,

producers can raise the investment capital they need to

participate in the new rural economy, not only for energy

development but for other value-added ventures that use new

technologies — such as broadband Internet — to market

processed goods directly to consumers. Responsible and

transparent leveraging of land and other assets will assist in

providing the equity needed to develop new high-value

opportunities which are of greater value than basic

commodities. 

What does this mean for the 60 million people who call

rural America home? It presents them with the unprecedented

chance to generate wealth, job opportunities and a selfsupporting rural economy that provides a high standard of

living. But in order for that to happen, a large subset of rural

residents will need the opportunity to participate — to

become owner-investors, providing the capital to encourage

development and then reaping a share of the profits to be

realized from the sale of high-value products. 

Cooperatives are one potential investment vehicle available

to rural Americans, but they’re not the only vehicle. To

maintain and increase market share in a rapidly changing rural

environment, cooperative managers and members need to be

flexible, adaptable and willing to re-examine their business

models and change them as needed. 

In the dynamic marketplace that is rural America,

investment will occur, whether through cooperatives or other

sources. In that light, it is important that our cooperatives —

which have served rural America for so long — position

themselves to participate fully in the new rural economy. This

will benefit not just the members, but will improve the

economic vitality of rural America as a whole. 

— By Thomas Dorr, Under Secretary

USDA Rural Development ■

2 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Commentary 

Co-ops and the future of rural America 

T
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 3

Rural Cooperatives (1088-8845) is published

bimonthly by USDA Rural Development, 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.

Ed Schafer, 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.

Rural COOPERATIVES COOPERATIVES

November/December 2008 Volume 75 Number 6

p. 4

p. 13

p. 16

p. 20

O n t h e C o v e r :

On the cover: Wind turbine installation was a round-the-clock job at

the Westmill Wind Farm Cooperative, in Oxfordshire, England. The coop is owned by more than 2,300 members of the local community. See

page 4. Photo by Martin Phelps, courtesy Westmill Wind Farm Co-op

F E A T U R E S

4 Rewards of Ownership

Community-based renewable energy projects can produce big benefits

By Julie Curti and Justin Goetz

10 Carbon Credits for Farmers 

Co-ops can play role for members managing dairy waste with digesters

By K. Charles Ling & Carolyn Liebrand

13 Vermont dairy farm turns manure into

renewable energy 

By Lisa Halvorsen 

16 Grain industry must evolve, adjust to a new

market paradigm

Maintaining strong capital base critical for country elevators 

By Phil DiPofi

18 Co-ops ring up additional $14 billion in sales

via other ownership structures 

By E. Eldon Eversull

20 Sky’s the Limit! 

Housing co-op opens doors for first-time ownership 

By Dan Campbell

26 CCA salutes top co-op communicators 

28 CDF’s multi-pronged efforts support co-op

mission in America and abroad 

By Steven Thomas

D E P A R T M E N T S

2 COMMENTARY

8 FOCUS ON

14 CO-OP DEVELOPMENT ACTION

22 UTILITY CO-OP CONNECTION

24 MANAGEMENT TIP

30 NEWSL INE

37 ANNUAL ARTICLE INDEX
By Julie Curti and Justin Goetz

Editor’s note: Curti and Goetz are both

Truman-Albright Fellows who have been

working with the Cooperative Programs of

USDA Rural Development.

ike many communities

around the country, the

school district in Wray,

Colo., faced a sharply

growing electricity bill,

coupled with state budget cuts and

declining student enrollment. To make

up for the shortfall, in 2002 a vocational

and agricultural technology teacher at

the high school suggested a creative

solution: build a wind turbine. 

Not only would the turbine bring a

new source of revenue, but it also

would provide hands-on opportunities

for students to learn about renewable

energy. After receiving approval from

the board of education, a citizen

committee formed to conduct a

feasibility study and carry out the

project. 

The community rallied around the

project, with donations, a bond project

and in-kind support providing the

school district with funds for the 900-

killowatt (kW), 335-foot-tall turbine.

An innovative company, NativeEnergy,

provided the final funding boost by

purchasing the carbon benefits the

turbine has been generating since it

began turning in February of 2008.

NativeEnergy (www.native

energy.com) funds community-based

renewable energy projects on tribal

lands and family farms in rural areas.

Since the company’s founding in 2000,

it has sold renewable energy credits and

carbon offsets to businesses and

individuals. Revenue from these sales

are then used to finance renewable

energy projects. 

“NativeEnergy is committed to

solving the climate crisis by helping

indigenous groups and at-risk

communities to build renewable energy

projects as a meaningful step toward

developing sustainable economies in

4 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Rewards of Ownership

Community-based

renewable energy projects

can produce big benefits

L
harmony with core cultural values,” says

Tom Boucher, NativeEnergy president

and CEO. 

NativeEnergy has collaborated with

rural communities on 15 projects to

date. In 2006, it provided funding by

purchasing expected carbon emission

reductions from the member-owned

Alaska Village Electric Cooperative

(www.avec.org/about-us.php), which

owns and operates several wind turbine

projects serving 53 remote villages and

tribal communities in Alaska. Another

recent effort supports the low-impact

Boulder Creek Hydro Project, which is

owned by the Confederated Salish and

Kootenai Tribes on the Flathead

Reservation in Montana.

Models for community

energy projects

Many successful models exist for

rural communities to follow when

creating renewable energy cooperatives

or partnerships with private enterprise. 

In Nebraska, the town of Plainview

was beginning to fade economically.

Since the town of 1,350 is in the center

of a large corn-producing area,

residents began thinking about the

potential for ethanol production. After

conducting a resource assessment, the

town pooled millions of dollars to build

a 25-million-gallon, community-owned

ethanol facility. The plant has been

operating for four years, and has

generated $130,000 in property tax

revenue and $30 million in added

income to local farmers during that

time. 

The city of Ashland, Ore., took

another approach to community-based

renewable energy. In July 2008, the

city-owned electric utility installed a

63.5 kW community solar electric

system on a city facility. Citizens can

purchase a panel or portion of a solar

panel, enabling them to buy the output

of the solar system for 20 years and

receive a credit on their electric bill for

the amount of renewable electricity

their panels have generated. 

Under this system, residents who

either don’t have the capital to invest in

a solar system for their home or

business, or who do not have the solar

exposure, can still use renewable energy.

In addition, the city has a cooperative

marketing partnership — called Green

Tags (www.b-e-f.org/offsets/ashland

.cfm) — with the Bonneville

Environmental Foundation. Under this

program, citizens can purchase carbon

offsets. For every green tag purchased,

Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 5

These wind turbines, part of the Westmill Wind Farm

Cooperative, provide electricity to 2,500 homes. Photo by Martin

Phelps. Above, residents of Ashland, Ore., can purchase a solar

panel (or a portion of one) on this city-owned building to receive

a credit on their electrical bill. Photos courtesy Westmill Wind

Farm and city of Ashland
the city receives funds to

invest in local renewable

energy programs.

Many countries, from

India to South Africa,

have started successful

community-based renewable energy

projects and co-ops. The United

Kingdom, for example, is home to a

number of thriving community-owned

cooperative wind farms clustered

around a dozen communities

(www.energy4all.co.uk). 

In these co-ops, community

members purchase a portion of a wind

farm and receive an annual dividend on

its profits. Community ownership

empowers local decision-making and

maximizes the local economic benefits

of renewable energy projects, as more

money stays in the community than

when outside owners are involved.

Community-cooperative

wind farm

One successful community-based

wind cooperative in the United

Kingdom, Westmill Wind Farm

Cooperative, is 100 percent locally

owned by more than 2,300 co-op

members (www.westmill.coop). Since

February 2008, the project has been

using five wind turbines that produce

electricity for 2,500 area households. 

In addition to providing a source of

clean energy and adding to the local

revenue stream, Westmill Co-op

promotes energy efficiency and

conservation measures in the

community. It is the largest

community-owned and built wind

cooperative in the United Kingdom. 

“Westmill Co-op is a superb

example of what individuals intent on

making a difference can achieve

together,” says co-op director and local

farmer Adam Twine. “It’s very exciting

that after such a long struggle the

turbines are now up and generating

green power. I hope Westmill will

inspire other communities to take

similar initiatives in their own locality

and in their own way.”

From Wray to Plainview,

community-based renewable energy

projects have already positively

impacted many rural areas. And this

trend has the potential to continue:

analysts predict that in the next 20

years, we will see upward of $1 trillion

invested in renewable energy projects. 

Yet, it is important to realize that

every renewable energy project will not

necessarily provide net benefits to its

community. To ensure that a renewable

energy project is beneficial, it is critical

for that community to be actively

involved in planning for a project and

to think and plan beyond just the

feasibility study. 

Communities need to consider the

broad range of a project’s economic,

social and environmental impact and

integrate the project as fully as possible

into their vision for the

future. In short, if they

haven’t already done so,

communities that are

considering a renewable

energy project should

first complete a community

development strategic planning process.

They also must ask how the proposed

project will help the community achieve

its vision.

Strategic planning process

There are four phases that comprise

a community development strategic

planning process. They are (in order): 

• Community assessment — community

leaders and citizens collectively assess

local resources and the strengths,

weaknesses, opportunities and threats

facing the community.

• Strategic planning — community

members use results of the assessment

to determine where the community

wants to go (the vision) and how it can

get there (a strategic plan).

• Implementation and benchmarking —

the strategic plan is implemented; the

community takes action on specific

strategies and measures progress.

• Evaluation — the overall community

development process is judged based

upon results produced.

Ultimately, the strategic planning

process revolves around a communitybased assessment of resources and

opportunities, planning and the

implementation of the plan. The

community determines the objectives

and timeline of the process, with citizen

6 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Students from Rosebud Elementary School tour an Alaska

Village Electric Cooperative wind turbine. Photo courtesy

Intertribal Council on Utility Policy
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 7

input and feedback

gathered every step of the

way through town hall

meetings, focus groups

and outreach to

community organizations. 

This input and feedback from

community members is key to the final

decisions. Typically, overall authority

and ultimate decision-making are in the

hands of a steering committee made up

of local stakeholders, leaders and

development experts who represent a

diverse cross-section of the community. 

By completing this process, a

community will be in a much better

place to understand its priorities and

needs, and to make strategic choices

about what kinds of renewable energy

projects will best enable it to move in

its desired direction. 

Benefits of local ownership

Among the most important questions

for a community to consider are those

of ownership and scale. John Farrell, a

research associate at the Institute for

Local Self-Reliance, stresses that: “The

key to sustainable rural economic

development and the renewable energy

future of America is a series of modest

sized, locally owned wind farms, solar

plants and biofuel refineries.” 

Locally owned renewable energy

projects are more likely to use locallyobtained inputs, profits are more likely

to circulate locally and the community

has an increased chance of retaining

higher-paying management jobs

associated with the project. There are

direct economic advantages from inputs

into the project and indirect economic

advantages in terms of added businesses

and industries that will prosper from

money that is re-infused into the local

economy by the project. 

“The success of homegrown

renewable energy lies in two key

findings,” Farrell says. “Very large

renewable power plants and

biorefineries cannot be locally owned

past a certain size because the capital

costs are beyond the community’s

wherewithal. But the rewards of local

ownership are significant, delivering

anywhere from 25 to 300 percent more

economic impact to rural communities

than from identically sized absenteeowned facilities.”

There are further tangible

advantages to community-driven

renewable energy projects. Strategic

planning for renewable energy brings a

community together and allows its

citizens to focus positively on their

future. It also gives a community a

direct stake in the renewable energy

project. 

Benefits can also come in terms of

working towards energy independence

and improving the local environment by

using renewable energy sources. A

renewable energy project could even be

a source of tourism revenue. In Wray,

the project provided a

platform to engage young

people in cutting-edge

technology education.

Ultimately, each

community needs to

decide what kind of renewable energy

projects will be best for its needs and

what kind of projects best fit its vision

for the future. Engaging in a

community development strategic

planning process and focusing on

community-driven models will help to

ensure a renewable energy project’s

success. 

It is also important to realize that

successful renewable energy projects

don’t necessarily happen quickly. The

wind turbine project in Wray took

more than six years to complete. In the

case of the Westmill Wind Co-op, the

idea of a wind farm was first raised 15

years ago and ultimately took four years

of community planning and action to

bring to completion. 

In some cases, where communitydriven strategic planning was not used,

rural renewable energy projects have

failed to be economically viable. But

communities that are actively involved

in assessing their needs and planning

for their future can safeguard the

investments they put into renewable

energy projects and ensure a bright

future for their community, on their

own terms. ■

The village of Kasigluk, Alaska, (seen here from the air) is

getting electricity from wind turbines operated by a memberowned utility cooperative. Photo courtesy Alaska Village Electric

Cooperative
By Anne Todd

USDA Rural Development

ongards’ Creameries, a

farmer-owned

creamery co-op, was

launched in 1908 in the

town of Bongards,

Minn., when 72 area dairymen banded

together to market their milk. Their

goals were straightforward: to produce

fresh, wholesome and great-tasting

dairy products at a price that could

sustain their livelihood.

Each member invested $25 a share in

the co-op. They transported milk to

Bongards’ in cans and trucks. Onsite,

they sold milk and cream and made

butter. 

In 1942, Bongards’ Creameries

expanded to include cheese-making

facilities, and entered into the cheesemaking business. The co-op made

natural cheese for 30 years, and

subsequently expanded production

again to include processed cheese.

Traditional crafts still practiced

Today, Bongards’ still makes one of

the country’s most distinctive cheeses

using the same traditional craftsmanship

that the original members brought to

Bongards’ starting in the 1900s. Those

skills, now paired with 21st century

technology, produce quality cheese with

a distinctive taste. 

In the last 10 years alone, the co-op

has received almost a dozen awards for

its cheddar cheese, including Champion

Cheddar awards in 2004 and 2007, and

international recognition in 2005 at the

British Empire Cheese Show. 

Bongards’ Creameries currently

manufactures dozens of dairy products,

from butter and whey powder to cheese

curds. Bongards’ has 490 members, and

about 300 to 400 more if dairy

producers who supply the co-op’s

“feeder” plants are factored in. 

In 2003, the co-op purchased a

building from Land O’Lakes and

moved its natural cheese production to

Perham, Minn. This was a more costeffective option than upgrading the

facility in Bongards. 

The Perham plant makes all of the

natural cheese and has total control

over its quality and consistency, day in

and day out. High-quality whey powder

is also produced at the Perham location.

In an average year, Perham produces

millions of pounds of both natural

cheese and whey powder.

The Bongards site includes the 

plant for processed cheeses, a

warehouse and a recently expanded and

8 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

B

Focus On

Craftsmanship paired with technology as

Bongards’ celebrates centennial

Bongard’s Creameries is celebrating 100 years of making prize-winning cheeses, including Champion Cheddar

Awards in 2004 and 2007. Photos courtesy Bongard’s
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 9

upgraded retail outlet. 

Private label focus

The majority of

Bongards’ products are

sold to private labels.

However, Bongards’ name

brand products are sold

online on its website, at the

retail store at Bongards’

main facility and at local

stores in the Upper

Midwest. 

Selling to private labels

has allowed Bongards’

members’ to focus on their product

rather than on their competitors in the

dairy industry. “We’re large enough to

serve our customers, yet small enough

to be responsive to their needs,” says

Bongards’ Creameries General

Manager Keith Grove. 

Being able to use so much of the

milk trucked into Bongards’ facilities is

a big key to the co-op’s success.

Bongards’ adds value to that milk

throughout the processing cycle, and

isn’t dependant on outside

commodities. 

In the future, Bongards’ hopes to

build on its success in the

dairy industry while

making the Bongards’ site

a destination for travelers.

The co-op is now selling

sandwiches and ice cream

at its retail store, in

addition to their cheese

and milk products. It is

also adding a picnic area,

and even moving the giant

Bongards’ cow across the

street to encourage

travelers to visit. 

“We want to make it a

country stop,” says Grove. 

For more information about

Bongards’ Creameries, visit:

www.bongards.com,

Or contact General Manager Keith

Grove: keithg@bongards.com, (952)

466-3514. ■

Strips of cheese head for the slicer, after which they will be wrapped for the co-op’s packs of individual slices (above).
10 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

By K. Charles Ling & Carolyn Liebrand

Agricultural Economists

USDA Rural Development

Editor’s note: This article is based on a forthcoming USDA report

on cooperative approaches for implementation of dairy manure

digesters.

ethane from anaerobic digestion of dairy cow

manure may qualify for carbon credits if

collected and prevented from emitting into

the atmosphere. According to the Second

Assessment Report (1996) of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the

global warming potential of methane is equivalent to 21

times that of carbon dioxide. This means the reduction of the

emission of one metric ton of methane gas has the effect of

reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emission equivalent

to 21 metric tons of carbon dioxide.

(Although IPCC has updated the global warming potential

of methane to 23 carbon dioxide equivalent in its Third

Assessment Report (2001) and to 25 in the Fourth

Assessment Report (2007), 21 carbon dioxide equivalent

continues to be used for consistency in greenhouse gas

inventory reporting.)

A business or organization may strive to reduce its

contribution to global warming potential by taking steps to

mitigate its direct or indirect greenhouse gas emissions. In

case its effort is short of its own set mitigation goal (or cap),

the firm may want to offset its shortfall by purchasing

greenhouse gas reduction credits (“carbon credits”) from

others who could provide credible net-reduction claims. 

In this way, the firm disciplines itself by paying a financial

penalty for not meeting its own emissions reduction goal,

while offering incentives to providers of offset credits, such as

dairy farmers who capture methane from anaerobic digestion

of cow manure for use as fuel. This so-called “cap-and-trade”

system works to cut overall greenhouse gas emissions, which

are usually measured in carbon dioxide equivalent. 

Carbon credit trading systems

Various systems for buying and selling carbon credits are

in varying stages of evolvement in the United States. These

transactions could be made by private negotiations, or the

trading could be through formal exchange mechanisms. For

example:

Co-ops can play role for members

managing dairy waste with digesters

Carbon Credits for Farmers
• Cash market: The Chicago Climate Exchange claims to be

“North America’s only — and the world’s first — global

marketplace for integrating voluntary, legally binding

emissions reductions with emissions trading and offsets for

all six greenhouse gases.” It was launched in 2003. (Source:

Chicago Climate Exchange.) Trading on this exchange is

similar to a commodity cash market. 

• Futures market: The Chicago Climate Futures Exchange, a

wholly owned subsidiary of the Chicago Climate Exchange,

“is a CFTC-designated contract market, which offers

standardized and cleared futures contracts on emission

allowances and other environmental products.” (Source:

Chicago Climate Futures Exchange.)

The Green Exchange contracts began trading in March

2008. However, the Commodity Futures Trading

Commission (CFTC)-regulated Green Exchange is expected

to launch during the first quarter of 2009. The Green

Exchange — a partnership between New York Mercantile

Exchange and Evolution Markets — claims that it “will be

the most globally integrated marketplace for the trading of

environmental products. It will enable market participants to

gain exposure to environmental trading markets and manage

their risk via a diversified product slate, from Europe’s carbon

allowances and Kyoto-based carbon credits to U.S. voluntary

carbon credits, renewable energy credits and emissions

allowances.” (Source: Green Exchange.)

• Auction: The World Green Exchange, launched by the

World Energy Exchange in February 2008, brings together

buyers and sellers of carbon credits (among other green

commodities) by holding auctions. The Exchange claims

the auction process provides “a superior price discovery

mechanism by enabling buyers and sellers to see what the

market will command in real time, thus allowing the true

forces of market competition to deliver the efficient pricing

result.” (Source: World Green Exchange.) Occasionally, the

Chicago Climate Exchange also conducts auctions for

members to fulfill specific needs.

Carbon credit trading standards

Just like all traded commodities, certain standards and

specifications are required of carbon credits to facilitate the

transaction. Some basic requirements of the underlying offset

projects for carbon credits could be:

• The methane gas that is captured from anaerobic digesters

actually results in net reduction of carbon emissions, as

compared to a certain base period.

• The claim of carbon credits (i.e., net reduction of carbon

emissions) is measurable and verifiable.

• The ownership of the claim of carbon credits is clearly

established.

On the Chicago Climate Exchange, the closing price of

Carbon Financial Instrument Vintage 2008 started the year at

$1.90 per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent. It rose to

peak at $7.40 at the end of May and the beginning of June,

and then declined to $4 on July 15. The simple average for

the first 137 trading days this year is $4.98, which amounts to

an extra income of about $25 per lactating cow per year for

dairy farmers who have carbon credits to sell. 

This potential revenue will not fully cover the cost of

installing anaerobic digesters. But the sale of carbon credits

could at least partially offset the cost of animal waste

treatment. Under certain conditions, further credit also may

be available if the captured methane gas is used as fuel for

electricity generation.

Costs of carbon credit trading

There are costs involved in selling carbon credits to cover

administrative and trading expenses. If the credits are sold

through an aggregator, the costs may include one or all the

following: 

• An aggregation fee charged by the aggregator, the going

rate of which is around 10 percent of the value of the carbon

credits, or about $2.50 per cow at the carbon credit value

cited above. (More about aggregation is explained below.)

• A trading fee, such as fees for registration and sales through

the Chicago Climate Exchange. For example, one aggregator

quoted a trading fee of 20 cents per metric ton of carbon

dioxide equivalent, or $1 per cow per year.

Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 11

Sale of carbon credits

can at least partially

offset the cost of

treating manure in

anaerobic digesters.

Photo courtesy

University of Vermont

Cooperative Extension
12 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

• A project verification fee(s), if the anaerobic digester system

and the claim to the carbon credits need to be verified.

Initial and annual verifications may be required.

(For other examples, see: Michigan Conservation and Climate

Initiative; National Farmers Union; Iowa Farm Bureau.)

Potential roles for cooperatives

As of November 2007, the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) was aware of 95 anaerobic digester projects in

19 states. These digesters collectively reduce 20,892 metric

tons of methane emissions per year (438,742 metric tons of

carbon dioxide-equivalent). 

The number of digesters in any region may not constitute

the kind of critical mass cooperatives would need in order to

play a significant role (at this time) in marketing carbon

credits. However, as a service to members, a dairy

cooperative may want to inform them of the opportunity to

generate returns by marketing carbon credits as an additional

benefit of treating waste with an anaerobic digester. Indeed,

some cooperatives have already done so.

If installations of anaerobic digesters on dairy farms

become more common, a critical mass of members may ask

their cooperative to pool and help market their carbon

credits. Pooling is most likely necessary to aggregate a large

enough volume for efficient marketing. 

The reason for this is that a lactating cow weighing 1,376

pounds generates about 5 metric tons of carbon dioxide

equivalent of methane gas in a year through anaerobic

digestion of her manure. That amount is only about 20

percent of the size of a Chicago Climate Exchange’s Carbon

Financial Instrument contract (i.e., a contract represents 100

metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent). In other words, it

would take 20 to 25 cows a year to satisfy one single contract.

The Chicago Climate Exchange defines aggregators as

“entities that serve as the administrative representative, on

behalf of (greenhouse gas) offset project owners, of multiple

offset-generating projects.” The Exchange further stipulates

that “Offset projects involving less than 10,000 metric tons of

CO2-equivalent per year should be registered and sold

through an Offset Aggregator.” 

Offsetting 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent

by flaring methane produced from anaerobic digestion of

dairy manure would require the waste of more than 2,000

lactating cows. However, only 595 dairy operations had that

many cows in 2007, representing just 3.5 percent of all U.S.

farms with more than 100 cows (USDA National Agricultural

Statistics Service). Therefore, most dairy farms would need to

register and trade through an aggregator.

Co-op bargaining role

Through joint actions by members, a cooperative may be

able to bargain for lower marketing fees and/or higher

returns. Depending on the needs of the members,

cooperatives may play these roles in the marketplace of

carbon credits:

• A co-op may engage a broker(s) to negotiate with carbon

credit purchasers on prices and terms of trade.

• A co-op may act as a broker to negotiate with carbon credit

purchasers on prices and terms of trade.

• A co-op may engage an aggregator(s) to trade carbon

credits for members. 

• A co-op may act as an aggregator if there is enough volume

of carbon credits generated by members. In essence, the

function of an offset aggregator is similar to that of a milkpool administrator, and dairy cooperatives are well

experienced in the pooling operations.

• A co-op may form a joint venture with other co-ops to

provide aggregator services to members. The joint venture

would have a broader membership base to operate.

• Because verification of the anaerobic digester system’s

impact on greenhouse gas reduction is usually required, a

cooperative may engage verifiers, or have verifiers on its

field service staff to carry out the function. 

Thus, a cooperative could help its members maximize the

benefit available from the sale of carbon credits by

negotiating the highest prices possible for the credits and

minimizing the costs associated with selling carbon credits.

Combined with other revenue streams associated with

byproducts of anaerobic digestion (avoided purchases and/or

sales of energy and of other byproducts), carbon credits could

contribute additional cash flow to enhance the economic

feasibility of digester projects. 

Editor’s note: References used for this article will be listed in the

forthcoming USDA research report upon which it is based. They

are also available upon request from the authors: Charles.Ling@

wdc.usda.gov, or Carolyn.Liebrand@wdc.usda.gov. ■

Graphic courtesy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
By Lisa Halvorsen 

Editor’s note: The article was contributed by

the University of Vermont Cooperative

Extension Service.

ike many top dairy

producers in Vermont,

Brian and Bill Rowell

attribute their success

in large part to their

ability to think outside the box to

maximize available resources to

maximize profits. Cow comfort ranks

high on their agenda, as does

communicating effectively with their 15

fulltime employees and using

sustainable practices to protect the

environment and preserve the land for

future generations. 

The owners of Green Mountain

Dairy LLC, a 1,050-cow operation in

Sheldon, Vt., also embrace changing

technologies to improve their herd

average and increase revenue from their

cows beyond what they get for their

milk. Installation of an anaerobic

methane digester system two years ago

enables them to convert manure

produced on the farm into renewable

energy. The Rowells milk 900 cows on

a twice daily milking schedule in a

double-15 milking parlor, shipping their

milk to the St. Albans Cooperative

Creamery.

For their innovative practices, this

dairy farm has been named the 2008

Vermont Dairy Farm of the Year.

University of Vermont (UVM)

Extension and the Vermont Dairy

Industry Association, in cooperation

with the New England Green Pastures

Program, select one outstanding

Vermont dairy operation for this

prestigious award every year. Each

nominee is evaluated on several criteria

including pasture, crop and herd

management programs; production

records; conservation practices;

contributions to the dairy industry and

local community; and overall excellence

in dairying. 

Glenn Rogers, a UVM Extension

farm business management specialist

based in St. Albans, notes that “this is a

very clean, very well-kept operation.

They do an outstanding job with their

cows. They pay attention to detail, as

indicated by their well-managed herd

and quality crops going into the

bunkers. 

“They also provide lots of outreach

to the community with open houses for

the public and other farmers to tour the

farm and the methane digester system.

An estimated 7,500 people from more

than 20 countries have toured the farm

since 2006. That all played into the

judges’ decision to present the award to

this farm this year.”

Numbers needed to make

system work

Green Mountain Dairy is one of the

largest farms in Franklin County,

milking 900 cows and growing corn and

grass for haylage on 1,200 tillable acres

on farms purchased in Sheldon,

Swanton and Highgate, as well as some

leased land. 

While the farm is regulated by the

Large Farm Operations Program of the

Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food

and Markets, Brian Rowell is quick to

point out that this is a family farm. The

numbers are what make it work

economically, he explains. “When we

were in the planning stages 10 years ago

for this farm, we ran the numbers and

found we needed 800 cows. Having 400

cows would have worked for us back

then, but to succeed, you need to make

it work for today and for tomorrow.” 

“Every farm, be it big or small, in

Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 13

Vermont dairy producers Brian Rowell (center) and Bill Rowell (right) check on the onfarm generator that produces electricity from a manure-to-methane gas digester on

their Green Mountain Dairy Farm. Photo courtesy University of Vermont Cooperative

Extension 

continued on page 36
14 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

By Donna Uptagraff, 

Cooperation Works!

ike many agricultural

businesses, the poultry

industry is experiencing

tough times. Surveys of

poultry growers in

southern Missouri, northwest Arkansas

and northeast Oklahoma indicate that

propane costs and environmental issues

are top concerns. Rising production

costs are making it difficult for growers

to make a living. Soaring propane prices

have led to increased interest in

bioenergy systems for heating poultry

houses. 

Recognizing poultry producers’

interest in lowering fossil fuel

consumption while also decreasing fuel

costs, Winrock International’s Arkansas

Rural Enterprise Center engaged Jim

Wimberly of BioEnergy Systems LLC

to perform a review of biomass furnaces

for heating poultry houses in the

northwest Arkansas region. Biomass

furnaces burn renewable products, such

as wood, corn or litter pellets in order

to create heat. Funding for the study

was provided by a Cooperative

Development Grant from USDA Rural

Development. 

Fuel costs are the primary expense

for poultry growers, but changing a

broiler house’s heating system involves

costs as well. The initial assessment

found that typical poultry houses using

propane gas for heating require a

savings of approximately $12,300 per

year for a bioenergy system to achieve

break-even economic performance. 

Fuel costs are not the only reason for

Co-op Development Action

Poultry industry explores 

ecological options to save energy

Rising fuel and other production costs are hitting poultry producers very hard. A USDA-funded study examined alternative fuel

sources that might help reduce heating costs.
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 15

poultry farmers to switch to bioenergy

systems. Growers report a variety of

reasons for interest in the systems,

including a preference for using a

renewable fuel. 

Additionally, air emissions from

biomass furnace systems are far below

regulated levels, and numerous

environmental and economic benefits

are associated with the dry heat nature

of biomass-fired furnaces. 

Study weighs efficiency of

five biomass fuels

The Winrock study evaluated five

types of bioenergy systems. These

furnaces use a variety of fuel sources,

including: cordwood, corn, wood pellet,

raw litter, and pelletized raw litter.

Each system has its own particular

traits, and is in a different state of

development.

A cordwood-fired furnace, for

example, requires manual fuel loading

and ash removal. Such furnaces have

been commercially available for many

years and fuel is readily available. A

corn-fired furnace system, on the other

hand, is available with automated fuel

storage, handling and in-feed, but

requires manual ash removal. 

These furnace systems are

commercially available, and more than

30 units have been installed at poultry

farms in the region during the past two

heating seasons. Recent fluctuations in

corn prices raise some questions about

the economic sustainability of this

model.

Wood pellet-fired furnace systems

use a wood-based fuel with automated

fuel storage, handling and in-feed, with

manual ash removal. Several such units

have been demonstrated in the past.

Most of the commercially available

corn-fired furnace systems can be

modified to use readily available wood

pellets as well.

Litter-fired furnace systems are still

in development, but were evaluated

because of many positive features.

Litter-fired furnaces would turn waste

products into fuel and produce heat

with an extremely low-cost fuel source.

While a raw litter-fired furnace system

was evaluated due to farmer interest, no

such units are commercially available

despite numerous efforts and

investments during the past 25 years. 

Likewise, pelletized litter-fired

furnace systems are not commercially

available, but it is expected that some of

the commercially available corn-fired

furnace systems could be modified to

use litter-derived pellets. Wimberly

notes that the rate of ash production

would be significantly higher with

litter-derived pellets than with corn or

wood pellets.

Primary conclusions

After extensive examination of capital

investment costs and operating costs of

these five systems, the analyses indicate

that:

• Cordwood systems are economically

feasible but labor-intensive.

• Corn-fired systems are only feasible if

cull corn or on-farm-produced corn

can be obtained well below current

market prices.

• Wood pellet-fired systems are

feasible, provided that assumed

system efficiencies and service life are

achieved.

• Raw litter-fired systems would be very

feasible if such systems can be

designed and fabricated to meet all of

the fundamental criteria set forth in

the report.

• Pelletized litter-fired systems are not

feasible under the assumed

conditions.

For more information regarding the

review, please contact Winrock

International at www.winrock.org. To

receive an electronic copy of the review,

contact Marsha Burkhalter at

mburkhalter@winrock.org. ■
16 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

By Phil DiPofi 

Executive Vice President, CoBank

t’s no secret that the

U.S. grain industry has

undergone radical

changes over the past

two years. Prices for

corn, wheat and soybeans began

climbing steeply in the fourth quarter

of 2006 and climbed steadily to near

historic highs earlier this year. Strong

international demand, a persistently

weak dollar, biofuels production and

capital from institutional investors all

played a key role in that remarkable

run-up. 

More recently, with the sudden

onset of the global credit crisis and a

strengthening dollar, grain prices have

dropped sharply once again. Though

they still remain well above historic

norms, the latest downward swing

further illustrates the volatile shifts that

have come to punctuate the current

commodities market. Traditionally, it

has been rare to see corn prices move

by much more than 50 cents over the

course of a growing season. Today,

price swings of more than $1.50 per

bushel in a single month have occurred.

The same dynamic holds true for wheat

and soybeans. 

Obviously, no one can predict the

future with certainty. But it seems the

reality is that we have entered an era in

which significant volatility is now the

market norm for grains. It’s also time

for the grain industry — in particular

the country grain elevator — to evolve

in order to remain appropriate for this

new business paradigm.

Many country elevators — a

linchpin of the U.S. grain handling and

grain marketing system — experienced

financial stress during the run-up in

grain prices due to the huge new

working capital requirements of their

businesses. Much of that stress related

to hedging positions taken in the

futures market to mitigate price risk. In

fact hedging, the very tool used to

reduce price risk, has in some

circumstances become a risk itself due

to soaring capital requirements created

GRAIN

INDUSTRY

MUST EVOLVE,

ADJUST

TO A NEW

MARKET

PARADIGM

Maintaining strong capital base 

critical for country elevators 
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 17

by large and frequent price swings in

the futures market and resulting margin

calls. 

In today’s volatile markets, hedging

has become extraordinarily capital

intensive and is one of the primary

drivers behind the increased demand

for debt capital on the part of grain

elevators and agricultural businesses in

general.

At CoBank, one of the largest

financiers of grain in the country, we

have seen dramatically increased

borrowing needs for virtually all of our

grain customers during the climb of

grain prices. We and other financial

institutions, both inside and outside the

Farm Credit System, have worked to

accommodate these customers during

this unprecedented time and will

continue to do so.

But credit is not an unlimited

resource — especially in the current

economic environment. And borrowing

more, without a commensurate increase

in earnings and equity capital, is not a

long-term solution to this problem. In

our view, the grain industry needs to

make two key adjustments going

forward:

1. A new approach to price-risk

management — Historically, the lion’s

share of hedging risk in the system has

been borne by the country elevator.

Elevators, furthermore, have often been

willing to contract to purchase crops for

multi-year time periods – agreeing to

purchase grains at a specific price even

before crops were planted. Elevators

have used the futures market to hedge

against potential price drops in the

market. More recently, country

elevators have continued to bear the

majority of the cost of these price-risk

management programs.

But what was an acceptable business

practice for elevators in the days of $2-

a-bushel corn is proving far less

workable when prices soar. 

No one party in the grain industry

should assume the financial burdens

associated with protecting prices for

another level in the system. Since

everybody benefits from hedging, the

risks and costs need to be spread across

a broader base – one that specifically

includes producers. For farmers, that

may mean less pricing flexibility from

elevators for future crop years.

Recognize, however, that farmers will

always have the option of using a

broker to access the futures market on

their own.

Most farmer-members of the nation’s

grain elevator co-ops will recognize and

appreciate the merits of this approach.

After all, they have an ownership stake

to protect in their local elevator – as

well as a vested interest in the overall

health of the U.S. grain delivery system

in which the elevator plays such an

important part.

2. Maintaining a strong capital

foundation — Even if elevators

successfully shift some of the risks

associated with hedging to their

member producers, the working capital

requirements of their businesses will

have the potential to spike upward as

long as volatility in the grain market

persists.

Managing those higher capital

requirements, first and foremost, will

require solid business practices that

create the basis for a strong capital

foundation. On the most basic level,

that means having a well-designed

business plan that is flexible enough to

respond to market conditions. It means

doing an excellent job of offering

farmers pricing options on crops as well

as timely service in accommodating

high production at harvest. 

It means understanding and pricing

sales with appropriate margins. And it

means making sure that operating

overhead is balanced and appropriate.

In some cases, preserving working

capital may require some tough

decisions, such as putting off planned

plant expansions, selling assets that are

not critical to the business, holding off

on new property and equipment

purchases, or reducing dividend

distributions to owners to strengthen

liquidity.

Looking at the bigger picture, there

are a variety of steps that grain elevators

can consider as they look to preserve

and build working capital. Deciding on

which, if any, of these options is right

for a given grain elevator requires

careful scrutiny and analysis. A

profitable course of action for one

operation may not be the right solution

for another. 

One of the biggest ways a

cooperative grain elevator can build

capital is by retaining more earnings.

Operators should be looking closely at

their future liquidity needs as they

calculate how much patronage they

return to members. More of that capital

may need to stay at the elevator to fund

inventories of higher priced farm inputs

or margin calls. While producers

certainly appreciate cash payments, they

also will appreciate having a financially

sound grain elevator that will be able to

buy their crops in the future.

Another option worth exploring is

partnering with other grain elevators.

Working with another co-op in a joint

venture may be a practical and efficient

way to spread risks and costs over

multiple balance sheets. These kinds of

arrangements may allow smaller

operations to realize the benefits of the

economies of scale that larger

organizations enjoy.

All members of the grain industry

value chain — farmers, elevators,

lenders, shippers, millers, exporters,

biofuels producers and consumers —

have a vested interest in guiding the

sector through this important transition

period. By making these changes in

behavior and building foundations of

financial strength, elevator operators

will help the industry fulfill its longterm promise. ■

“Working with another co-op in a joint venture may be a practical and

efficient way to spread risks and costs over multiple balance sheets.”
18 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

E. Eldon Eversull 

Agricultural Economist

USDA Rural Development

arm, ranch and fishery cooperatives had

additional sales of at least $14 billion in 2007

from other, non-cooperative business

ventures they have formed or invested in to

market products or sell supplies. These other

businesses represent more than $7.5 billion in assets. 

The Cooperative Programs staff of USDA Rural

Development surveyed cooperatives about their use of other

ownership structures for business ventures in 2007. There

were 728 respondents, with 204 noting that they used other

ownership structures to bolster revenue to the co-op. 

Since not all co-ops responded to the survey, the actual

sales total from these non-cooperative business ventures is

almost certainly higher than $14 billion — perhaps

significantly higher. If these revenues were added to the total

co-op business volume reported annually by USDA ($147

billion in 2007; see page 19 of the Sept.-Oct. issue of Rural

Cooperatives), co-ops would account for an even bigger share

of the nation’s food and farm supply market. 

Other ownership structures used by cooperatives in this

study include limited liability companies (LLC),

corporations, limited liability partnerships (LLP),

partnerships and other types ownership structures (“other”

hereafter). This study was used to determine how many

cooperatives used these ownership structures, their

percentage of ownership and the sales and assets of these

ventures. 

Variety of incentives for ventures

There are a wide variety of reasons for a cooperative to

use a non-cooperative ownership structure. For example, a

cooperative that would like to build an ethanol plant or a

food-manufacturing facility may not be able to raise enough

Co-ops ring up additional $14 billion

in sales via other ownership structures

Co-ops ring up additional $14 billion

in sales via other ownership structures

Table 2—Structure of the venture, percent ownership, sales, and assets by cooperative type

Ownership structure of the venture Percent ownership by your cooperative

Corp- Partner- 1% to 20% to Wholly Venture Venture

Cooperative Type LLC oration LLP ship Other 20% 49% 50+% owned sales assets

Number Number Billion $

Cotton and Cotton Gins 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0.022 0.025

Dairy 37 5 0 0 1 3 6 16 18 6.633 3.686

Fruits and Vegetables 5 3 1 0 0 1 3 2 1 0.032 0.009

Grains and Oilseeds 141 10 3 1 2 65 40 36 11 1.782 1.341

Livestock & Artificial 

Insemination 4 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0.020 0.010

Nuts, Poultry, Dry Beans

& Peas, Sugar 5 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 0.729 0.510

Other Marketing 5 3 0 0 1 2 0 3 4 1.661 0.217

Supply 106 20 6 2 4 21 28 48 36 2.772 1.650

Service 5 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 3 0.240 0.090

312 44 10 3 10 95 78 111 82 13.892 7.537

Table 1—Number of ventures, sales and assets, by cooperative type

Cooperative Type Number Ventures Total sales Total assets

Number Billion $

Cotton and Cotton Gins 3 5 0.346 0.156

Dairy 9 43 12.764 5.078

Fruits and Vegetables 6 9 1.372 0.485

Grains and Oilseeds 85 159 7.455 3.744

Livestock & Artificial 

Insemination 4 5 0.408 0.121

Nuts, Poultry, Dry Beans &

Peas, Sugar 7 7 1.196 0.926

Other Marketing 5 9 0.235 0.147

Supply 80 138 28.844 11.040

Service 5 7 0.015 0.022

204 382 52.635 21.720
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 19

funds from its members or through bank loans. An LLC

might be formed to obtain funds from outside investors to

make this venture possible. 

In another case, two cooperatives might form some other

type of ownership structure for their agronomy operations,

allowing the co-ops to offer more services, personnel and

equipment by pooling resources. Several cooperatives might

form a business using some other ownership structure as a

first step toward a possible merger. If the co-ops prove

compatible when working together in the venture, they

might opt to eventually form a single cooperative. 

While there are many reasons for forming other

ownership structures, this study did not ascertain why they

were used nor determine whether the ventures were with

other cooperatives, investor-oriented firms, or non-member

investors. Some of the ventures in this study could be

between cooperatives, which would lead to double counting

of their sales volume. A more through analysis is planned

using information from this survey to document the use of

alternative ownership structures and their importance. 

LLCs most common

The 204 survey respondents who reported using other

business structures are involved in 382 such ventures. Of

these, 312 (82 percent) were LLCs (figure 1). In 96 of these

LLCs, the co-ops owned more than 50 percent of the

business (figure 2), while 53 of the businesses were wholly

owned by the co-ops. Thus, co-ops held a controlling interest

in 48 percent of the 382 businesses. 

A wide variety of cooperative sizes (by sales volume) are

involved in ownership of these businesses (figure 3). On the

high end were 12 co-ops with sales of more than $500

million that have invested in at least one LLC. On the other

end of the scale are 11 co-ops with sales of less than $5

million that have LLCs. The largest number of cooperatives

(47) with an ownership stake in one or more LLC reported

annual sales of between $25 million to $49 million. 

The cooperatives that reported being involved in at least

one of these “other ownership structure” businesses account

for just over 34 percent of the nation’s total co-op business

volume. Grain/oilseed and supply cooperatives accounted for

most of the survey respondents (as would be expected, since

they represent by far the largest number of surveyed co-ops).

Responses from cotton and cotton gins, livestock, artificial

insemination, nuts, poultry, dry beans/peas and sugar

cooperatives were combined in tables 1 and 2.

About half of the sales and assets documented in this study

would not be captured in USDA’s annual statistical report on

cooperatives, since the co-ops do not have a controlling

interest in the venture. The sales volume would be reported

as a distribution of earnings from the business venture (net

income) on the income statement of the respondents,

appearing in the “non-operating income” category, or as

“income from other ventures.” ■

Figure 1—Number of ventures by type

Figure 2—Percent ownership of all different structures

Figure 3—Number of respondents by size of sales (million $)
By Dan Campbell, Editor 

high percentage of homes

occupied by owners is a

vital ingredient for healthy

neighborhoods. When

people have an ownership

stake in their homes, they naturally tend to

take better care of them and get more

involved in civic affairs. 

So with the renter-vs.-ownership ratio

nearing 50:50 in Bath, Maine, community development

director Al Smith began thinking about a housing

cooperative as one way to open doors to homeownership for

people who would otherwise be renters.

“Maine is a very rural state, and like most rural areas, it

tends to have a high percentage of homeownership,” says

Smith, talking over a cup of coffee in Bath’s lovely old city

hall building. “I was intrigued by the idea of a co-op to

provide easier access to homeownership and as a tool to

strengthen and maintain our wonderful neighborhoods. The

idea of a co-op just seemed to make a lot of sense for a

community like Bath.”

Shipbuilding roots

Bath is a city of about 10,000 people on the Kennebec

River in the Midcoast region of Maine, but the population

swells greatly during the summer tourism season. It has a

proud history as one of the nation’s primary shipbuilding

centers, having built and launched more than 5,000 oceangoing ships since the 1700s. 

Bath was a major builder of clipper ships, beautiful sailing

vessels that were the fastest of their day. At one time, it was

home to more than 200 shipbuilding firms, and by the mid1800s it was the nation’s fifth busiest seaport. 

This tradition is carried on today by Bath Iron Works

(BIW), one of the state’s largest employers, with a workforce

that ranges from about 5,000 to 6,000 (depending on current

contracts). This is down from a peak of about 12,000 in the

1980s, Smith says. 

Booms in shipbuilding during the two world wars and

again after World War II resulted in construction of a

number of public-financed housing developments in Bath.

“Being an older city [Bath incorporated in 1781], the

housing stock is older, and renovation is an issue for many

homes,” Smith says. “So we have fair amount of affordable

housing and multifamily properties, but with a fair amount of

absentee landlords.” 

His plan was to find an older property that could be

converted to co-op ownership. 

Co-op model studied

Before a property was selected, city planners first looked at

the co-op model and studied how a housing co-op could be

developed and promoted in Bath. Funding was then secured

for a project that would accommodate low-to-moderate

income people. 

“We saw this as an opportunity to showcase the idea of a

limited-equity co-op as a path to ownership,” says Smith.

“The way we did it may not be suitable everywhere, but I

believe this model could be replicated to provide access to

20 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Sky’s the Limit!

Happy together: members of the Oak Street Cooperative (above and on facing

page) say the co-op made it possible for them to become home owners. Community

Development Director Al Smith is wearing a cap, at rear. Background photo: cranes

loom up at the Bath Iron Works shipyard, one of the state’s largest employers.

USDA photos by Dan Campbell
ownership and lead to greater stability for neighborhoods.” 

A Community Development Block Grant was secured

from the Maine Department of Economic Development,

which was matched by the Federal Home Loan Bank of

Boston. The effort was also backed by several other

organizations in the community, including the Bath Housing

Authority, which acted as the project developer. Coastal

Enterprises assisted with home homeownership and budget

management classes. 

“The city’s role was organizing the co-op and training the

members — a fairly long process,” Smith says. 

Attention first focused on a 35-duplex development in the

Lambert Park neighborhood. “It was being operated by a

nonprofit, but the property needed a lot of improvements

and a large balloon payment was near due, so the owner

basically wanted out,” Smith says. 

This effort eventually stalled. Rather than risk losing the

funding already secured, the group started looking for

another property. 

This was in 2005, and the real estate market in Bath was

still fairly strong. But reports that the nearby Brunswick

Naval Air Base was slated for closure resulted in a number of

properties being placed on the market as the owners tried to

beat the base closure.

Five-unit building selected

A multifamily property with five units in two adjacent

structures caught Smith’s eye. Although this would be a

smaller project than he originally conceived, it was an

attractive property for a number of reasons. 

The original building dated to 1858, the other to about

1900 (they form an “L”-shaped structure), but it was in

reasonably good repair. “It is a great location – right on edge

of downtown, with short walks to the library, city hall, a food

market and other stores,” Smith says. “And most units have a

water view.” 

It needed electrical renovation (which turned out to be a

bigger job than originally thought) and painting. Drains had

to be installed around the foundation to dry out a damp

basement. 

Members did much of this work themselves under a sweatequity program, which allowed them to cut in half the $2,000

co-op membership fee. Members had to show that their

income was no higher than 50 to 80 percent (depending on

the unit desired) of Bath’s $38,000 median income.

Smith says buying and renovating the property ran

roughly $450,000, of which about $240,000 was financed

through the Cooperative Fund of New England, which is

charging no interest for the first three years. “That gave us a

nice jump start.” 

The Oak Street Cooperative of Bath Inc. has nine

members living in five units: one three-bedroom unit, two

two-bedroom units and two one-bedroom units. The co-op

has been fully occupied since November of 2007. 

Part of a members’ monthly payment goes against

principal, creating equity. “Our lease-sale formula provides

that people can earn up to five years of the principal. We

wanted them to gain equity, but to keep the overall property

affordable.”

Like a family

The camaraderie among the members, and pride of

ownership, was evident when Smith led a visitor on a tour of

the property. All households are co-op board members,

which Smith says has helped develop “a sense of family” and

mutual support among the members. 

Some structural work still needs to be done, including a

stone wall along the street frontage that will likely have to be

replaced at some point. The co-op has limited cash reserves

at this point, so the board has had to come to grips with

budgeting for repairs as funds allow. 

Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 21

continued on page 23

Housing co-op opens doors

for first-time ownership 
By Anne Mayberry 

Utility Programs,

USDA Rural Development 

aintaining reliable

electric service at

affordable rates is the

cornerstone of the

nation’s 900-plus rural

electric cooperative utilities. With

increasing energy costs, that goal is

becoming more challenging. 

Yet rural electric cooperative utilities

are meeting that challenge. Jackson

EMC and Southern Maryland Electric

Cooperative (SMECO) recently scored

the highest customer satisfaction marks

among midsize utlities in their regions,

according to J.D. Power and Associates.

Jackson EMC also was noted for

achieving the highest customer

satisfaction score among utilities of any

size nationwide. 

Jackson EMC, based in Jefferson, Ga.,

and SMECO, based in Hughesville,

Md., received recognition in J. D.

Power and Associates’ 2008 Electric

Utility Residential Customer

Satisfaction Award for midsized utilities

(those serving between 125,000 and

499,000 residential customers) in the

South and East, respectively. Two more

rural electric cooperative utilities —

Santee Cooper in South Carolina and

Clay Electric Cooperative in Florida —

won the second and third place scores

(respectively) in the South. The award

is based on the results of an annual

consumer survey conducted by J. D.

Power and Associates. 

The award to SMECO came as a

complete, but very welcome, surprise. 

“Our first notice that we’d received

any kind of award was receiving the box

with the trophy,” recalls SMECO

President and CEO Joe Slater. “My

assistant opened it and brought it to my

office. A few days later, J.D. Power and

Associates called us.” 

Key to customer satisfaction

How do Jackson EMC and SMECO

run efficient utilities and simultaneously

keep customers satisfied?

“All of our employees understand

that we work for our owners — our

customers,” Slater explains. “The

cooperative business model allows us to

stay focused; we’re not distracted by

earnings per share. We are not driven

by a profit motive. We put our

customers first.”

Randall Pugh, Jackson EMC

president and CEO, says: “Jackson

EMC’s focus has never shifted from the

day we first powered our lines in 1939;

the focus is providing our members

with high quality service and reliable,

affordable power. Every decision we

make is with our members’ best

interests in mind, and we truly

appreciate this response from our

members.”

Pugh says that 2008 marked the first

year the co-op was included in the

study. “When I look at this award, I’m

reminded of 461 reasons why we

received this honor — our employees,”

he adds. 

Slater says SMECO’s award is

22 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Utility Co-op Connection

Putting service ahead of profit helps

utility co-ops win JD Power Award

The commitment to service of Jackson EMC employees, such as these, helped the

co-op win the highest consumer rating for a utility of any size in the nation in J.D.

Power and Associates’ annual survey. Photo courtesy Jackson EMC 
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 23

especially gratifying because it is the

result of the co-op earning high

customer satisfaction ratings. For many

electric customers, the real test of

service from their utility is how the

company responds during emergencies. 

“We tend to have a lot of storms in

southern Maryland, but we’re able to

provide good information to our

customers because of our outagemanagement system,” Slater says.

Installed two years ago, the system

connects mobile laptops with SMECO’s

computer systems, allowing crews to

use technology to pinpoint and quickly

respond to outages. “People like

certainty. They want to know what

caused the outage and when their

power is coming back on.” 

SMECO’s involvement with the

community “helps touch a lot of lives

through our scholarships and various

other projects,” Slater says. 

The most basic cooperative

advantage may be the unique financial

structure of rural electric co-ops. The

cooperative business model emphasizes

reliable service at affordable costs.

Member equity is often listed as one of

the benefits of being a rural electric

cooperative customer. This same

business model produces positive credit

ratings for rural electric cooperatives,

which reduces the cost of borrowing

money.

“Our business model not only

increases customer satisfaction, but also

takes the form of high credit ratings —

higher than many investor-owned

utilities,” Slater notes. “This in turn

translates into lower funding costs.” 

Co-op advantages

Martin Lowery, executive vice

president of external affairs for the

National Rural Electric Cooperative

Association (NRECA), echoes Slater’s

assessment, adding that a key advantage

of the cooperative business model is

that “members have equity in

cooperatives.” 

Lowery says the reputation of

cooperatives for service is well

deserved. “Businesses that care about

serving their members tend to have

great reputations,” he notes. “I hear all

the time about how great co-ops are

and how much their customers love the

service they receive from rural electric

cooperatives.”

Rural electric co-ops serve 41

million consumers in 47 states,

according to NRECA. Co-ops are the

fastest growing segment of the electric

utility industry, and are concerned

about how to address growing demand

for electricity. 

Like most electric utilities, SMECO

and Jackson EMC work hard to ensure

that long-term power supply is reliable

and affordable. The fact that SMECO

and Jackson EMC are locally owned

and operated increases their

responsiveness, Slater says. “We’re part

of the community we serve.” 

Most cooperatives, by their nature,

tend to be good corporate citizens, he

adds. “We have plans for conservation

and efficiency. We have plans to build

new transmission lines. We keep our

customers informed of our issues and

activities and were ranked very highly

for that effort.”

Pugh credits employees with the

recognition from J. D. Power and

Associates. “Jackson EMC’s employees

have a long-standing dedication to

provide service that exceeds our

members’ expectations, whether that

means quickly restoring power after a

storm, making sure our bills are

correct, promptly handling members’

requests, or planning infrastructure

additions to ensure adequate power

supplies.”

Slater says the detailed survey results

that came with the award are being

studied by the co-op. “We’re really

interested in any places where our

scores could have been higher. We’re

going to see what we can do to earn a

higher rating.”

One example Slater cites is to

expand the ability of SMECO

customers to set their own billing due

dates. “This is one area we want to

continue to focus on. Our customers

want options, flexibility and control.

We’re seeing how we can accommodate

those interests.” ■

“It would have been very hard for

me to buy a place without this co-op,”

says Steven Cummings, the co-op

president and a first-time homeowner.

“It feels awesome — I love it here. It’s

got a view, and the heating cost is

reasonable.”

Cummings, like all the other

members, has never served on any type

of board of directors before, so the coop classes and sessions on budgeting

were very helpful, he says. “I highly

recommend co-op living for anyone

with lower income or poor credit.” 

Solo Martin, who works at a

preschool, couldn’t agree more. “It’s

beautiful here and we [she shares a unit

with her sister] are very happy. I’ve

never been a homeowner before, and

being on a co-op board and working so

closely with the other members is an

entirely new experience for me. We all

sort of look after each other!”

Since the Bath co-op was formed,

another small housing co-op, Faire

Brande, has been developed in the city

of Lewiston, about 26 miles away. 

Co-op housing opportunities

“I see tons more opportunities for

similar co-ops in this region,” says

Smith. “Rockland, Belfast — and

Brunswick with its large student

population — would all be good places

for housing co-ops.” 

The concept of small housing co-ops

like the Bath model might even have

applicability for meeting the need for

group homes for handicapped people

around the nation, many more of which

are needed as more large residentialtype institutions are phased out. 

“I would love to see some other

housing co-ops formed around here so

we could explore going in together on

purchasing heating fuel and on

maintenance work,” Cummings adds.

“The sky’s the limit for this co-op!” ■

Sky’s the Limit!

continued from page 21
24 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

By Jean Freeman, President 

Jean Freeman & Associates

Editor’s note: The author is a Fairfax, Va.-

based consultant who specializes in

governance and communication issues for

cooperatives, nonprofits and for-profit

companies.

here is no question that

all governing boards are

under the spotlight

today. Due to some

highly publicized

scandals in both publicly traded

companies and nonprofits, in which

board members did not properly fulfill

their duties, many cooperative boards

are taking a closer look at their

governance practices, including their

long-range planning and monitoring

systems. 

Some boards, however, are so

enmeshed in short-term compliance

issues that they risk dropping the ball

when it comes to long-term leadership.

One of the best tools available to

cooperative boards in fulfilling their

important fiduciary duties is the

dynamic process of strategic planning.

Few people will disagree that

planning is important. However, many

may be unclear about what strategic

planning is and why it is so critical to

the future success of the organization. 

What is strategic planning? Simply

put, it is the process of determining

where the co-op is going over coming

years, how it will get there and how the

co-op will know when it has succeeded.

There is no one correct method of

planning strategically. However, there

are some key tools which should be

considered when a board takes on this

process. 

Reach consensus on need

The board must thoughtfully explore

the need for strategic planning. It is

almost as wrong to jump into the

process without first reaching consensus

on the need to do so, as it is to fail to

go through the planning process at all. 

Once consensus is reached, the

strategic planning team can begin the

important work ahead. For small

boards, it is common for the team to

include all sitting board members, along

with the manager or CEO and key staff

members. Some co-ops may include

other stakeholders in the process.

Review the mission

Before beginning to plan for the

future, the board should review the coop’s statement of purpose, or mission

statement. This statement should

concisely describe why the organization

exists, what services it provides and, in

some cases, what core values will be

maintained in the process. 

The mission statement is the

umbrella under which all plans should

then fit. The board should look

carefully at the co-op’s mission and

Management Tip

Co-op boards demonstrate leadership

through strategic planning process
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 25

agree that it is still completely relevant

and accurate. If not, this is the

appropriate time to tweak the mission

to reflect the current culture and

membership expectations.

Review former plan

This may not be the first time the

co-op has worked on the strategic

planning process. If there is a strategy

in place, this is a good place to get

started. 

Board and management participants

(“the team”) can look with fresh eyes at

what is in place and begin thinking

about how clearly the existing plan

reflects the purpose of the organization.

Create the strategy

Any board member at any time

should be able to answer the question:

“Are we still heading toward the place

we want to be?” The board should do a

thorough analysis of current conditions,

future projections and potential

competition for its cooperative’s goods

and services. 

Based on this thorough analysis,

board members can then develop a

strategy. At this point, it is important to

take a good look at membership needs

and the co-op’s ability to create value

for its membership. 

Remember, once the strategic

planning process has been completed,

leadership must continue to think

strategically to keep on track.

Good set of tools needed

Mission, vision, values, goals — As

stated before, it would be a waste of

time for a co-op’s leadership to begin a

strategic planning process without

reaching consensus for a clear mission.

If you have established that mission,

and if the board feels passion for that

mission, then you’re ready to move

forward. 

The board should at least revisit that

mission to make certain it is indeed why

your organization exists. Some like to

establish additional statements, such as

a vision or a values statement. It isn’t

necessary for all organizations to adopt

the same set of statements. However,

the mission is a necessary statement of

purpose. Goals and objectives will

naturally flow from a targeted mission

statement.

Environmental analysis — A part

of the planning process should include a

hard look at the current and the likely

future environment. This analysis might

include legislation, consumer survey

results, economic development,

technology, competition and other areas

with the potential to impact the co-op’s

ability to stay on mission.

SWOT — Some find the exercise of

identifying strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities and threats (SWOT) a

very helpful tool. The co-op leadership

can benefit by including key staff and

stakeholders in this exercise. Of course,

the team must head into the planning

process open-minded and ready to hear

from different players with different

perspectives. 

Executing the plan

No matter how beautiful a

completed plan may look, it is only a

beautiful symbol of a waste of valuable

time unless the board builds in

monitoring requirements to hold others

accountable for keeping the plan in

play. These monitoring tools typically

involve reports from management to

the board at scheduled intervals.

The board of directors is responsible

for establishing the mission, hiring the

manager or CEO, providing financial

oversight and monitoring the progress

of the organization. Once the hard

work of developing a strategic plan is

done, it now becomes much easier to

make sure that goals are accomplished. 

The board now has a plan to hand

over to the manager, and the manager

now has a clear guidebook for putting

together an action plan and working

toward attaining the desired goals. It is

clear what types of monitoring must

take place in order to keep track of

progress. The board, with a solid plan,

is positioned to demonstrate

transparency to its membership. 

Keep the plan alive

Although a lot of planning takes

place in any well-run company, strategic

planning is not done every month. It

may not even be necessary to conduct

full-blown strategic planning every year.

But it is important to review the plan

and monitor its progress on a regular

basis.

Many organizations “visit” their plan

on a monthly basis, simply by reviewing

monitoring reports from management.

In most cases, plans should be reviewed

at least annually. 

Although no board wants to restrategize frequently, it is important to

remember the plan is not static. We live

in rapidly changing times. Regulations,

technology, climate and member

expectations, to name a few, are not

static areas. Therefore, it makes sense

for a responsible board to be prepared

to revisit the plan formally, as necessary.

■

Any board member at any time should be able to answer the

question: “Are we still heading toward the place we want to be?”
26 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

or his three decades of commitment to

cooperatives and communications excellence,

Paul Wesslund, vice president of

communications for the Kentucky

Association of Electric Cooperatives, has

been awarded the H. E. Klinefelter award. 

 The award is the Cooperative Communicators Association’s

(CCA) top honor, recognizing individuals whose work has

helped to further the cooperative business system and raise

the standards of cooperative communications. 

The award was presented in June during CCA’s annual

communications institute in Portland, Maine.

Jim Duncan, CEO of Sumter Electric Cooperative

(SECO) in Florida, won the CEO Outstanding

Communicator award. Marian Douglas, manager of

publications for Flint Energies in Warner Robins, Ga., took

home the Michael Graznak Award, which honors excellence

in co-op communications by a person under age 36. 

Susie Bullock, who is stepping down after serving as CCA’s

executive director for 18 years, was honored with a special

award and tribute, recognizing her efforts to advance the

organization and the state of co-op communications. 

Wesslund strengthens REC system 

Following four years working for daily newspapers in

North Dakota, Wesslund began his cooperative career with

the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association

(NRECA) in 1979. During a 16-year tenure with the

Washington, D.C.-based organization, he rose steadily

through the ranks to become associate department director of

communications services. 

In 1995, Wesslund moved on to the Kentucky statewide

REC, where he also serves as editor of the association’s

member magazine, Kentucky Living, which has a circulation of

400,000. 

“Paul has spent much of his career bringing meaning to

cooperatives in ways that clearly speak to their advantages

and strengths,” said nominator Jeff Almen, a coworker of

Wesslund’s during his years at NRECA. 

“Paul has been a mentor, confidant and friend throughout

my career,” added Darryl Gates of the Alabama Rural

Electric Association of Cooperatives. “I find myself studying

the successful programs he has created, and trying to find

ways to duplicate those efforts in my state.”

Wesslund is the 50th winner of the Klinefelter award,

named for a CCA founder and longtime editor at MFA Inc.,

who died in 1957.

Duncan communicates ‘co-op difference’

Duncan was saluted for championing the cooperative

difference at SECO, which he has led since 1990. Evidence

of this is manifested in every communications vehicle SECO

uses to interact with its various constituencies, both internal

and external, said award presenter Janet Schoniger of

CoBank. 

SECO is one of the nation’s largest electric co-ops, serving

165,000 member/customers in a Central Florida service

territory the size of Delaware. 

“What has evolved, by design, is a total communications

program that constantly reinforces the seven cooperative

principles, philosophy and way of doing business,” said

Schoniger. “More than that, it encourages two-way

communications and generates a sense of empowerment

where employees, customers and other constituencies are

concerned.” 

His leadership skills in the electric industry

communications arena has led to the co-op receiving some of

the highest American Consumer Satisfaction Index scores in

the country for a co-op of its size. 

Douglas: innovative communicator

Nominators said Douglas is an energetic and innovative

communicator whose impact has included “more focused

connections with members, more effective methods with

employees and more engaging avenues with the community.”

Douglas has more than 14 years’ experience in public

CCA salutes top co-op

Jim Duncan, CEO of Sumter Electric Co-op,

won the CEO Communicator award.
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 27

relations, including 10 years serving the electric cooperative

industry. While working for an advertising agency in South

Carolina, she managed advertising and public relations for 21

electric cooperatives in South Carolina and Georgia. 

Her resume also includes a stint as community relations

manager at Santee Electric Cooperative. While there,

Douglas successfully managed the cooperative’s crisis

communications efforts during Hurricane Floyd in 1999. She

also previously served as executive director of a chamber of

commerce. 

“Marian came to Flint, and to Georgia, in late 2004 with

respect for cooperative tradition, as well as a fresh perspective

and innovative mind that would consolidate and exploit our

communication tools and opportunities," recalled nominator

Robert Ray Jr., CEO of Flint Energies. 

The award is named for a young Missouri cooperative

communicator who died while on assignment.

Bullock takes final bow

Bullock announced last year that she is retiring from her

CCA post to devote more time to assisting her husband, Jim,

who was recently named vice president for academic affairs at

Ohio Valley University in Vienna, W. Va. 

Bullock, also a past Klinefelter award winner, joined CCA

(then the Cooperative Editorial Association) in 1975, just

after graduating from college. Ten years later, during the

organization’s business meeting in Chicago, Bullock recalled

lobbying for the name change to CCA. 

“The word ‘communicators’ rather than ‘communication’

not only humanized the organization, but it was more

descriptive of CCA’s multifaceted role in telling the

cooperative story,” Bullock said. “The name still accurately

reflects the involvement of not only writers and editors, but

of photographers, broadcasters, marketing specialists, public

relations directors, graphics designers, advertising managers

and Webmasters.” 

Changes made at CCA during her years as executive

director included: establishing CCA’s six-region membership

structure; developing its first website; establishing the board

liaison system of managing committees; computerizing

bookkeeping; moving the newsletter and membership

directory online; creating a number of new awards and

fellowships; developing a policy and procedures manual and

creating the Master Cooperative Communicator program,

among many others. 

“I encourage all of you to dive headlong into CCA

activities,” said Bullock. “Get involved and make your own

mark on CCA’s history.”

Contest winners

Best of Class award winners in CCA’s annual

communications contest were:

• Writer of the Year — Richard Biever of Indiana Statewide

REC Inc., (for a portfolio of articles);

• Photographer of the Year — David Lundquist of CHSLand O’Lakes (for a portfolio of photos); 

• Programs and Projects — Shane Read of Tennessee

Farmers Cooperative (for a print advertisement he

designed, “Grab the Great White”). 

• Publication of the Year — Brett Faber of Aurora Cooperative (for Aurora’s 1908-2008 Centennial publication). 

USDA’s Rural Cooperatives magazine won four awards in

the contest, including: First place for serious or investigative

feature writing, won by contributor Catherine Merlo (for

“When a Co-op Dies” about the closing of a California

cotton cooperative); First place photo illustration, won by

Assistant Editor Stephen Thompson for a piece of art in

which he transformed a milk bottle into an ethanol fuel

pump; Second place for serious or investigative feature

writing, won by Editor Dan Campbell (for “Thinking

Outside the Carton,” about Fruit Growers Supply co-op in

California); Honorable mention for Writer of the Year, also

won by Campbell (for a portfolio of articles).

For more information on CCA and how it helps co-ops

improve their communications efforts, visit:

www.communicators.coop. 

communicators

Graznak Award winner Marian Douglas and

Klinefelter Award winner Paul Wesslund.
28 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

By Steven Thomas, Executive Director 

Cooperative Development Foundation

he Cooperative Development Foundation —

the nation’s oldest cooperative charity —

may not be a household name, but it has

made a major impact on economic

development through cooperatives for almost

65 years. This work was initially done under the umbrella of

the Freedom Fund (beginning in 1944), then the Fund for

International Cooperative Development (1947), the

Cooperative League Fund (1969), and, ultimately, the

Cooperative Development Foundation (1988). 

Starting with the founding of CARE after World War II,

CDF began by helping European farmers recover from the

destruction of the war by providing “seed” funds to help

them form cooperatives — giving them the scale to reach

markets across Europe’s war-devastated infrastructure. CDF

retained an international focus until the 1980s, when it began

fundraising and forming programs to assist domestic

cooperatives, particularly in rural areas. 

Family of funds

Through a combination of bequests, donations and fund

additions, CDF now has 11 funds that seek to resolve

different problems through the development of different

types of cooperatives. These include the following:

• The Bowers Fund, which assists cooperative grocers, is one

of CDF’s most active funds. Its mission — to promote

consumer-owned food cooperatives in the United States —

is served through

grants for education

and training of

grocery cooperative

staff and board

members. 

• The MSC Fund,

CDF’s largest fund,

was established in

2004. Formerly the

Mutual Service

Fund of the MSI

Insurance Foundation, it has been in operation for more

than 30 years and has awarded more than $1 million in

grants to the cooperative community. In 2005, the fund’s

trustees decided that it would focus on projects and

organizations that find and/or replicate cooperative

solutions for issues facing seniors in rural areas. 

• The NCBA Fund supports the National Cooperative

Business Association’s cooperative development projects

and programs in the United States and overseas.

• The Sollars Fund strengthens the cooperative form of

business through interaction between U.S. and overseas

cooperatives. The fund provides grants to cover overseas

travel expenses of U.S. cooperative leaders, enabling them

to visit counterparts to exchange information, strengthen

T

The Race for Cooperative Development raises money and awareness of co-ops every October. This year, a record 15 teams, including

the ACDI/VOCA team (seen here), participated. Below:The ICA Group, a recipient organization of the CDF’s United Co-op Appeal, builds

worker co-ops, such as this sewing co-op. Photos courtesy Cooperative Development Fund

CDF’s multi-pronged efforts support

co-op mission in America and abroad 
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 29

trade and provide technical assistance.

• The Shirley K. Sullivan Education Fund was established in

1998 by the Cooperative Communicators Association

(CCA) to give its members scholarships for training. The

fund offers educational grants to cooperative

communications professionals, enabling them to attend

professional development seminars or classes, including

National Cooperative Business Association (NCBA) and

Graduate Institute of Cooperative Leadership (GICL)

programs and CCA’s annual co-op communications

institute. 

• CDF also has three revolving loan funds for cooperative

housing: one for senior cooperative housing, a second for

limited equity cooperatives and a third for student housing

cooperatives. These funds make pre-development and

bridge loans, leveraging substantial additional capital for

the creation, renovation and expansion of housing co-ops.

• The CDF Fund is a “special opportunity fund,” used to

make grants or loans to potentially significant cooperative

projects that don’t fall within the scope of CDF’s other

funds. 

What is the impact of these funds? Together, they create

opportunities for seniors and working families to own quality

homes; for students to obtain affordable housing and take

responsibility for running it; for people to obtain healthy

food; for farmers and others in developing countries to obtain

good prices for their goods at market; and for cooperative

leaders to learn to better serve their co-op and its members. 

Programs for cooperative

awareness and fundraising

In addition to its family of funds, CDF also operates

several programs designed to promote cooperatives and raise

funds for cooperative development. 

Foremost of these efforts is the Cooperative Hall of Fame,

which honors individuals whose contributions to cooperative

business have been genuinely heroic. Inductees are limited to

a group carefully

selected to

preserve the

nature of this

special

recognition. 

Each year

a select few men

and women are

honored because

of their heroic

contributions to

the enhancement

of cooperative

enterprise and to

the advancement

of the principles

of cooperation.

Nominations are received annually and reviewed by two

committees, each composed of current leaders from the

various sectors of the U.S. cooperative movement. More

information on the Cooperative Hall of Fame can be found

at www.heroes.coop.

The 5k Race for Cooperative Development is a certified

run/walk for all ages. The race calls attention each October

to Cooperative Month, an annual celebration of the impact of

cooperatives on the United States and its communities. It is

also a fundraiser for CDF. The race normally attracts several

hundred runners, including teams from more than a dozen

cooperative organizations. More information can be found at:

www.cdf.coop/5kRace. 

The online Co-op Art and Crafts Auction is a fun way to

profile the art and craft co-op community as an example of a

cooperative business and to help art and craft co-ops gain

visibility and new markets for their work. Visitors to the

auction website and catalog learn about the basics of a

cooperative business, as well as specifics about the artists and

the art and craft co-ops that participate in the auction. 

The funds CDF raises from this auction will build more

programs in support of art and craft co-ops as the auction

progresses. More information can be found at:

http://www.cdf.coop/node/7. 

The United Co-op Appeal (UCA) is an annual workplacegiving program that is managed by the CDF. UCA supports

16 nonprofit organizations that use the cooperative enterprise

model to bring self-sufficiency and economic development to

individuals and communities through the United States and

around the world. Since it began 15 years ago, UCA has

raised more than $1 million to support cooperative

development projects. 

Cooperative future

Part of CDF’s history has been a tradition of rapid

response to help cooperatives in need in disaster zones, from

postwar Europe in 1944, to New York City after the 9-11

terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana and

Mississippi in 2005, to the present day. Most recently, CDF

distributed $25,000 from its Katrina Recovery Fund to the

Federation of Southern Cooperatives to help establish fishing

cooperatives in areas damaged by Katrina. 

With emergency cooperative relief sure to be a part of

CDF’s role in the future, CDF is working to create a

systematic approach to emergency relief, with a dedicated

fund that will allow for more rapid response to disasters.

CDF’s longstanding role as a supporter of cooperative

housing will also play a clear role in the future; plans are in

place for a streamlining of process that will increase the

effectiveness of CDF’s efforts there. 

Ultimately, however, CDF’s model can be adapted to meet

any future cooperative needs just as it has in the past. This

flexibility of execution and timeliness of mission will drive the

changes CDF makes to prepare cooperatives for the 21st

century. ■

The National Rural Electric Cooperative

Association’s International Foundation,

a recipient organization of CDF’s United

Co-op Appeal, works on developing

electrical co-ops in Africa and other

developing regions.
30 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Prairie Pride biodiesel plant

fully operational

Prairie Pride Inc., a new-generation

cooperative, held a grand opening

ceremony in August at its $80 million,

210-acre soybean-crushing and

biodiesel plant near Deerfield, in westcentral Missouri. The plant, the first

phase of which began operating last fall,

will eventually convert 21 million

bushels of soybeans annually into soy

oil, which will then be processed into

30 million gallons of biodiesel fuel. 

With the opening of the soybeancrushing portion of the facility (which

had been using purchased soy oil), the

plant is now fully operational. In

addition to biodiesel, it will produce

about 486,000 tons of soybean meal for

livestock feed. 

Missouri Congressman Ike Skelton

and representatives for Kansas Senator

Sam Brownback and Missouri Senator

Kit Bond joined local officials for the

celebration. “Renewable fuels like

biodiesel and ethanol are good for rural

economic development, and renewable

fuels help ease our dependence on

foreign oil — which is a must for our

country,” Skelton said. 

More than 1,000 producers from

Missouri and several nearby states share

in the ownership and profits of the

operation. The co-op’s equity drive in

2005 raised more than $36 million in

less than four months. The average perproducer investment was about

$36,000. 

USDA Rural Development provided

a Value Added Producers Grant of

$100,000 in 2005 to help advance the

project.

The plant employs about 40 people

and is expected to generate more than

$250 million in sales annually. 

Co-op General Manager John

Nelson says the co-op has three

primary goals: 

• To provide soybean producers with a

value-added solution to marketing

their soybeans; 

• To reduce the United States’

dependency on foreign oil; 

• To reduce pollution by producing

clean, biodegradable fuel. 

Ocean Spray opens world’s

largest cranberry-processing

facility 

Ocean Spray has completed the

expansion of its facility at Wisconsin

Workers and guests assemble for the grand opening of the new, $85 million Prairie Pride co-op biodiesel plant in central Missouri.

Photo courtesy Prairie Pride. Below: Worldwide demand is soaring for dried sweetened cranberries, being produced by Ocean Spray

at its plant in Wisconsin Rapids. Photo courtesy Ocean Spray

Newsline

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

Co-op developments, coast to coast
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 31

Rapids, Wis., doubling the plant’s size

to 440,000 square feet, making it the

largest cranberry processing plant in the

world. 

“Ocean Spray is exactly the kind of

company we are excited to have here in

Wisconsin,” Governor Jim Doyle said

at an event celebrating the completion.

“I am pleased the state is able to partner

with Ocean Spray to expand their

facility in Wisconsin Rapids, and create

100 jobs for hardworking Wisconsin

families.”

“The Ocean Spray brand is stronger

than ever,” added Randy Papadellis,

president and CEO of Ocean Spray. “As

we commemorate the expansion of the

Wisconsin Rapids sweetened dried

cranberry production plant, we

reinforce Ocean Spray’s partnership

with the state of Wisconsin and our

dedication to growing more cranberries

and creating additional jobs in the

Badger State. If we can build on this

partnership and add more cranberries,

there could be even more added

expansion and jobs at this facility in the

future...but we need the fruit.” 

Ocean Spray invested $75 million,

the largest capital investment the

company has made in a manufacturing

facility, to add two sweetened dried

cranberry production lines to the

Wisconsin Rapids plant. The facility

incorporates some of the latest

technologies in energy and

environmental efficiency, bringing the

total incremental investment in the

facility to over $90 million during the

past three years. 

These additions include a wastewater

treatment facility, energy-efficient

lighting and an expansion of the system

that converts methane from the Veolia

Cranberry Creek Landfill into clean

energy to power the plant. A fullyracked warehouse for both ingredients

and finished goods allows increased

storage on a smaller footprint.

Global demand for Ocean Spray

sweetened dried cranberries has

doubled during the past three years and

is expected to double again over the

next three years. Currently, Ocean

Spray sweetened dried cranberries are

featured as ingredients in more than

1,000 different grocery, bakery and

dairy products internationally. 

AMPI names new CEO

Associated Milk Producers Inc.

(AMPI) has named Ed Welch as the

cooperative’s president and chief

executive officer (CEO). He

succeeded Mark Furth, who

is retiring after 38 years

with AMPI, the last 19 as

president and CEO, on Oct.

1. 

Welch, the current AMPI

chief operating officer

(COO), has held various

leadership positions during

his 25 years with the

Midwest milk marketing

cooperative. He managed

AMPI cheese manufacturing

plants and member services

in western Wisconsin before being

named the cooperative’s COO. In that

role, he has led AMPI dairy

manufacturing and marketing efforts.

“The AMPI board of directors

searched for an effective leader to take

the helm of AMPI. We found that

leader in longtime AMPI employee Ed

Welch,” says AMPI Chairman Paul

Toft, a dairy producer from Rice Lake,

Wis. “AMPI’s dedication to dairy

farmers and our reputation in the dairy

industry will continue to grow under

Ed’s leadership. He understands the

AMPI vision and the cooperative

foundation on which we are built.”

Welch, a graduate of the University

of Minnesota, is currently a member of

the American Dairy Products Institute

board and a past president of the

Wisconsin Dairy Products Association. 

Oglethorpe Power to build 

biomass power plants 

Oglethorpe Power Corporation

(OPC), the nation’s largest power

supply cooperative, has announced

plans to build as many as three 100-

megawatt (MW) biomass electric

generating facilities in Georgia.

Designed as carbon-neutral, the plants

will use woody biomass — one of the

state’s most abundant renewable

resources — and provide power to

OPC’s 38 member co-ops, which supply

electricity to nearly half of Georgia’s

population.

“With our abundant biomass

resources, Georgia has the unique

opportunity to expand our use of

alternative energy, grow our

economy and transform the

way we provide energy to

our citizens,” says Georgia

Governor Sonny Perdue.

“Oglethorpe Power’s

pioneering investment in

alternative energy is

consistent with our goal to

grow, convert, and use

biomass energy to power

our homes and businesses.”

OPC has secured

options for five potential

sites in Appling, Echols,

Warren and Washington counties. The

first two biomass power plants are

scheduled to be built and placed into

operation in 2014 and 2015. A third

unit could also be completed and placed

into service in 2015.

Capital investment in the biomass

plants will range from $400 million to

$500 million per facility, with each

providing about 40 full-time jobs. In

addition, each plant will require an

annual investment of more than $30

million for fuel stock alone and will

create a need for potentially hundreds

of new jobs in the state’s forestry

industry.

The power plants will be steamelectric generation stations using

conventional fluidized bed boiler/steam

turbine technology. Fuel for the plants

will consist of a woody biomass mixture,

including processed roundwood

(chipped pulpwood), primary

manufacturing residue (wood waste

from sawmills) and harvest residue

(wood remaining in forests after

clearing). The plants will be designed to

allow for the co-firing of other types of

biomass, such as pecan hulls and peanut

shells. There are no plans to use any

fossil fuels.

“With 12 million people expected to

Ed Welch
32 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

call Georgia home by the year 2030, we

will need more energy to meet the

demand of our growing population,”

said Chris Clark, executive director of

the Georgia Environmental Facilities

Authority.

USDA funds co-op centers

Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer has

announced that more than $4.5 million

in grants will go to 23 Rural

Cooperative Development Centers to

improve rural economic conditions in

22 states. Schafer announced the

funding investment during remarks at

the 41st annual meeting of the

Federation of Southern

Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund

(Federation) in Epes, Ala. 

“Rural Cooperative Development

Centers work closely to mentor

entrepreneurs and grow local business

with technical advice and research,” said

Schafer. “This hometown support, close

at hand, strengthens jobs and

opportunities throughout rural

communities.”

The 23 nonprofit groups and

institutions of higher education selected

may receive grants to finance up to 75

percent of the cost to establish and

operate centers for cooperative

development. For example, with a

$200,000 grant, the Federation will

fund the Cooperative Development,

Training and Research Center in

Sumter County, Ala. This grant is

expected to create and save more than

400 jobs, including those for 250 family

farmers and 100 fishermen.

In addition, two new rural

cooperative development centers will

be established with the funds

announced by Schafer: the Resource

Center for Value Added and Alternative

Agriculture at North Carolina State

University, and the Appalachian Forest

Resource Center in Clarke County,

Ohio.

USDA Rural Development helps

rural residents form cooperative

businesses and improve the operations

of existing cooperatives. It provides

technical assistance, conducts

cooperative-related research and

produces informational materials

(including this magazine) to promote

public understanding of cooperatives.

Funding for individual recipients is

contingent upon their meeting the

conditions of the grant agreement. For

a full list of the grants awarded, visit the

“News/Information room” at:

www.rurdev.usda.gov.

Minnesota dairy farmer

to chair Foremost Farms 

David Scheevel, a dairy producer

from Preston, Minn., has been elected

chairman of Foremost Farms USA.

Scheevel has been on the board for

more than 10 years, holding a variety of

leadership positions, including second

vice chair and secretary/treasurer. He

has also been a member of the board’s

personnel committee. 

Former chairman Edward Brooks

indicated he would not seek another

term as chairman after winning the

Republican primary race for

Wisconsin’s 50th Assembly District.

Brooks has been chairman of Foremost

Farms and its predecessor, Wisconsin

Dairies Cooperative, for 18 years.

Brooks has been involved in the

leadership of cooperatives for more 30

years and has advocated cooperative and

farm issues at the state and federal

levels. He continues to serve on the

Foremost board and its executive

committee. 

“Ed has been instrumental in the

formation and success of Foremost

Farms USA,” says Dave Fuhrmann,

Foremost Farms president. “His

contribution to this cooperative is

nothing short of

remarkable.”

Scheevel, a

graduate of the

University of

Wisconsin-River

Falls, is chairman

of the Minnesota

Dairy Leaders

Roundtable and

a member of the

Southeast

Minnesota Ag

Alliance, the

Minnesota Council of the Wisconsin

Federation of Cooperatives and

Minnesota Association of Cooperatives

(WFC-MAC). 

“These are challenging times in the

dairy industry with escalating costs and

uncertainty,” says Scheevel. “At the

same time, they are exciting times with

the emergence of international markets,

milk supply growth in the Midwest and

Mideast, and growth in demand for

finished products from this part of the

U.S. I believe Foremost Farms USA is

in an excellent position to both meet

and be a major player in these changing

markets.”

DFA adds Farm Services

Division; expanding plant

capacity in Colorado 

Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) has

formed a new Farm Services Division,

consolidating oversight of several

member service programs, including

risk management, health insurance,

financial services and bulk buying

programs. Greg Wickham will serve as

president of the division. He currently

serves as CEO of DFA-member

cooperative Dairylea and oversees

Dairylea’s extensive agricultural services

businesses, including several that are

currently in partnership with DFA. 

“Under Greg’s leadership of the

David Scheevel

Ag Secretary Ed Schafer (far left) presents

a USDA Co-op Development

Grant to Federation of Southern Co-ops

officers (from left): President

Woodrow Keown; Pam Madzima, co-op

development specialist; John Zippert,

director of program operations; Executive

Director Ralph Paige. Photo by

Heather Gray 
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 33

Farm Services Division, we expect

further collaborations between Dairylea

and DFA in the farm services area that

will benefit members of both

cooperatives,” says Rick Smith,

president and CEO of DFA.

Wickham will also continue in his

current role as CEO of Dairylea and

chief operating officer of DFA’s

Northeast Area. Wickham has managed

the Northeast Area’s farm services team

for the past 10 years and was key to the

formation of partnerships between DFA

and Agri-Max Financial Services and

Agri-Services health insurance. 

Agri-Max Financial Services, of

which DFA is half owner, allows

members to access complete dairy loan

packages for cattle, equipment and

operating expenses. Members also may

buy farm supplies in bulk through DFA,

saving them money and time.

DFA has also announced plans for a

$21 million expansion of a plant in Fort

Morgan, Colo. Eastern Colorado’s milk

production is growing rapidly, with 120

DFA member dairy farmers there

producing 144 million pounds of milk

per month. The expansion will create

seven new jobs and increase capacity by

2 million pounds per day. 

The Fort Morgan plant makes sweet

cream, condensed milk and nonfat dry

milk, all ingredients used to make

cheese, yogurt and ice cream.

Farm Credit System banks

purchase $60 million of Farmer

Mac stock

The Farm Credit System in October

announced it was making a $60 million

investment in the Federal Agricultural

Mortgage Corporation (Farmer Mac),

which provides a secondary market for

agricultural real estate loans, rural

home mortgages and rural utility loans.

Buying the senior cumulative perpetual

preferred stock of Farmer Mac are:

AgFirst FCB, AgriBank FCB, CoBank

ACB, Farm Credit Bank of Texas and

U.S. AgBank. 

An additional $5 million of Farmer

Mac senior cumulative perpetual

preferred stock has been purchased by

Zions Bancorporation of Salt Lake City.

Washington farmers grow their own fuel

With the high energy demands of operating their vehicles and equipment,

farmers suffer from high fuel prices even more than most Americans. But a few

producers in the Yakima Valley of Washington may have found a way to beat the

system by growing their own fuel.

The Heritage Farm Cooperative is a small group of ethnic-minority farmers —

mostly fruit, dairy and hops producers — who run their diesel engines on

sunflower oil pressed from a crop grown on their own farms. The co-op, in

association with Flower Power USA, an engineering firm, provides technical

assistance, business planning, conversion technology and crop-pressing

services. 

Ion Manea, a sunflower farmer, founded the cooperative and Flower Power.

He’s originally from Romania, where sunflowers have long been an important

crop. Manea points out that using sunflower oil for diesel engines is an accepted

practice in Germany, where the majority of U.S.-made tractors now run on it. 

A farm with 12 percent of its cropland planted with sunflowers can produce

all its own fuel and save substantial amounts of money, Manea adds. The

sunflower meal left over from crushing makes good cattle feed, and sunflowers

fit well into crop rotation with the wheat and corn grown for feed in the valley.

The sunflower oil is not catalyzed into biodiesel, but is burned directly in

engines using an inexpensive conversion kit. It can be burned straight or blended

with regular petroleum diesel. The oil obtained from special sunflower varieties

(with an oleic acid content of 80 percent) provided by the co-op is ideal for this

purpose, says Manea. The high oleic content means it burns cleanly and doesn’t

gum up in diesel engines, unlike other kinds of straight vegetable oil. 

The cooperative brings crushing services to each member using a mobile

plant mounted on a 40-foot semitrailer. The oil is treated with ultrasound to

remove partially-dissolved gases that can cause problems in engines. Filters

made with a special paper medium are necessary on engines burning the fuel.

Flower Power USA has won a USDA Rural Development Value-Added grant to

develop this technology. The firm has partnered with Heritage University, an

institution in Toppenish on the Yakima Indian reservation, to bring technical

assistance to local small farmers. 

Manea says they are also considering using sunflower oil in the smudge pots

used to protect orchard crops from early freezes. “These tip over sometimes, and

farmers don’t like having petroleum spilled around their trees,” he says. “Our oil

is harmless and biodegradable, as well as cheap.” 

— By Stephen Thompson, Assistant Editor 
34 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

The $65 million in total financing will

enable Farmer Mac to strengthen its

capital position and comply with its

minimum regulatory capital

requirements. 

“Farmer Mac enhances the

availability of agricultural mortgages

and, more recently, rural utility loans,

thereby assisting in the steady and

dependable flow of capital to American

farmers and ranchers and rural

America,” says Robert B. Engel,

president and CEO of CoBank,

speaking on behalf of his fellow System

Bank presidents. “In that regard,

Farmer Mac has been a valued partner

to the Farm Credit System, insurance

companies, commercial banks and the

National Rural Utilities Cooperative

Finance Corporation. 

“Given the unprecedented turmoil in

the broader financial services industry,

at a time when so many institutions are

struggling to maintain adequate levels

of capital and liquidity, we’re extremely

pleased that the Farm Credit System is

favorably positioned to support Farmer

Mac through this new investment,”

Engel adds. “Agriculture is a key

economic driver in our economy,

providing food, thousands of jobs and

biofuels that help make our nation

more energy-independent.”

Jamie B. Stewart Jr., president and

CEO of the Federal Farm Credit Banks

Funding Corporation, noted that the

FCS continues to experience strong

overall financial performance. The

System reported combined net income

of over $1.5 billion in the first six

months of 2008. As of June 30, 2008,

credit quality in its $162 billion loan

portfolio remained generally favorable,

and liquidity and capital levels were in

excess of all regulatory minimums, with

the System’s combined assets totaled

$208 billion. 

Midwest local co-ops

buy fuel business 

Effingham-Clay Service Co., Illini

FS and Lanman Oil Co. have

announced an agreement under which

the two agricultural cooperatives will

purchase Lanman Oil’s farm fuel

delivery, lube oil and non-branded

transport fuel businesses. Details of the

transaction were not disclosed. 

Randy Handel, Effingham-Clay

general manager, says the deal allows

Effingham-Clay and Illini FS an

opportunity to continue a long tradition

of service to rural east-central Illinois

residents. “We have a strong tradition

of reliably supplying quality fuel and

lube oil products that today’s customers

demand,” Handel says.

Effingham-Clay, founded in 1944,

provides farm-related inputs, including

feed, seed, plant food, crop protection,

fuel, lubricants and grain marketing

services to farmers and rural residents

in seven counties in east-central Illinois.

Illini FS provides ag-related products

and services to farmers and rural

residents in east-central Illinois. Illini

FS, a division of GROWMARK Inc.,

has offices in five counties.

Lanman Oil, founded in 1948,

provides service to east-central 

Illinois and western Indiana. 

CountryMark drilling for oil

across Illinois Basin region

The Indiana-based

CountryMark cooperative has

announced plans to drill for oil in

the Illinois Basin. The Illinois

Basin is a 53,000-square-mile

depression under southern Illinois,

western Indiana and western

Kentucky. According to

CountryMark President and CEO

Charlie Smith, it is one of the most

plentiful sources of domestic crude

oil in the Midwest. 

“Approximately 40,000 barrels

of crude oil are produced daily

from this region,” says Smith.

“This is an extremely dependable,

secure supply of energy for Indiana

and surrounding states.”

CountryMark is the largest buyer

of Illinois Basin crude and refines

the sweet crude at its Mt. Vernon

Indiana refinery. 

“As the productivity of old

wells declines, it’s important that

CountryMark do its part to invest

the necessary capital for newer,

high tech recovery methods to

maintain, or even increase, the

production of vital energy right here in

our own backyard,” Smith says.

To meet the needs of Indiana

businesses and growing world demand

for energy, Smith says the co-op has

elected to move from strictly

purchasing and refining American crude

oil to becoming actively involved in

drilling. “We will also continue to

purchase Illinois Basin crude, all of

which will be refined at our plant in

southwest Indiana.” 

The company will invest in both

vertical and horizontal oil wells.

Wisconsin co-ops

approve merger 

Members of Country Horizons

Cooperative and Valders Cooperative in

eastern Wisconsin have approved a

merger, which was effective Oct. 1. The

new cooperative will have eight

locations and 200 employees, with

CountryMark cooperative is expanding

its oil drilling efforts in the Illinois Basin.

Photo courtesy CountryMark
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 35

projected sales of more than $85

million annually. The combined operations will be 40 percent ag services, 30

percent retail-based and 30 percent

energy.

About 75 percent of Valders

Cooperative members approved the

merger, while 68 percent of Country

Horizons Cooperative members

approved it. Voting was done both by

mail and at a membership meeting. 

The co-op, which is working with a

third-party advisor to determine its new

name and some related issues, will be

governed by a nine-person board, with

five directors from Country Horizons

and four from Valders Cooperative.

Robert Lowe, general manager of

Country Horizons, has been named

CEO/general manager of the combined

company. He has more than 30 years of

experience as a cooperative general

manager. 

Lowe says members grasp the need

for competitive buying and financing

that only comes with combined

resources. “Cooperatives are unique in

that decisions like these are made as

part of a collective group, the members

and its board of directors,” Lowe says.

“Management and employees

are here to help member-owned

organizations remain

competitive and profitable so

the cooperative can continue to

return earnings to members.” 

“Our combined boards

believed it was the right time to

merge, and I’m glad our

members supported that vision,”

says Joe Holschbach, board

chair at Country Horizons and a

producer in the Manitowoc area. 

“Part of our past success has

been around partnering with

others,” says Paul Sorenson,

board chair of Valders

Cooperative. “Our two

cooperatives have worked together on

numerous ventures, including the

successful CP Feeds.” 

The stock or equity held by

members in each cooperative was

transferred Oct. 1 for equal value for

equity in the new cooperative.

Illinois co-op to

build wind farm 

Plans have been announced by

Prairie Power Cooperative to build a

20-turbine wind farm in Pike County in

western Illinois. The wind farm,

representing an investment of more

than $65 million, will generate enough

power to supply 16,000 homes. 

This will be the first wind-power

project for Prairie Power, which

currently operates electrical plants

powered by natural gas and coal. The

co-op says it will sell clean-energy

bonds to finance the project. 

The member-owned generation and

transmission co-op produces, purchases

and delivers more than 1.5 million

megawatt-hours of electricity annually

to its 11 member-owned electric

distribution cooperatives. These co-ops

provide retail electric service to more

than 83,000 consumer-members

throughout central Illinois.

USDA’s James Baarda retires

Dr. James Baarda, an agricultural

economist with the Cooperative

Programs of USDA Rural Development

in Washington D.C., retired Oct. 31.

Baarda worked

on a wide variety

of cooperative

legal and

economic issues

during the past

30 years and is

considered by

many to be one

of the finest

cooperative

minds and

speakers in the

nation.

His work in

recent years has

focused on the

legal, economic,

financial and business characteristics of

cooperatives that distinguish them from

other forms of business in a dynamic,

global economy. Baarda is the recipient

of USDA’s Superior Service Award and

the American Agricultural Law

Association’s Distinguished Service

Award for his contributions to

cooperatives. 

Baarda made numerous trips

overseas to promote cooperatives and

advise govern-ments on cooperative

laws, and has regularly taught a course

on cooperative law at the University of

Arkansas’ Master of Laws program in

Fayetteville, Ark. 

Baarda, who grew up on a small farm

in Iowa, earned a BS degree (chemistry,

physics and zoology) from Iowa State

University, a law degree from the

University of Denver School of Law,

and a PhD in economics from the

University of Florida. 

He worked with what was then

called USDA’s Farmer Cooperative

Service in Washington, D.C., for more

than 16 years, and then spent four years

as vice president of education for the

National Council of Farmer

Cooperatives. After domestic and

international consulting in Eastern

Europe and Former Soviet Union

republics, he joined a law firm in

Washington engaged in complex

nationwide class action as well as other

litigation.

In 2001, Baarda returned to USDA,

where he conducted research, writing,

training and speaking activities. 

USDA awards $1.8 billion in

electric loans 

Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer has

announced the selection of 33 rural

utilities and cooperatives in 26 states to

receive $1.8 billion in loans to build and

repair 7,600 miles of distribution and

transmission lines serving more than

90,000 rural customers.

“USDA partners with utilities across

the country to ensure the delivery of

affordable, reliable electrical power to

rural communities,” Schafer says.

“These loans are investments that will

spur or expand development

opportunities and enhance the

economic competitiveness for rural

areas as good places to live and work.”

The funding is being provided

through USDA Rural Development’s

Utilities Programs. ■

James Baarda
36 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

order to be sustainable and continue to

be viable in future years, needs sound

financial management,” says Tony

Kitsos, a farm management educator

with UVM Extension’s Farm Viability

Enhancement Program. The Rowells

talk daily and consult with their

financial advisors on a monthly basis to

fine tune their ongoing financial

management strategy. 

The higher producing animals are

milked three times a day. Their rolling

herd average is 22,000 pounds of milk

per cow with 3.8 percent butterfat and

3.1 percent protein. To ensure that the

herd gets proper nutrition, the Rowells

consult with two nutritionists every

week. These recommendations enable

them to feed their cows a total mixed

ration of corn silage, haylage, and

grains, balanced according to the

energy, protein, and fiber needs for

each group of cows according to their

stage of lactation. 

Managing manure for energy

As with any sizeable dairy operation,

efficient management of manure is

important. While many farmers invest

in larger storage lagoons to handle the

volume, the Rowells decided that an

anaerobic methane digester system to

turn manure into energy was a viable

economic option for them. They were

the third farm in Vermont to sign up

with Central Vermont Public Service

(CVPS) for its Cow Power Program. 

The installation of the digester cost

$2.37 million, which was offset partly

through $755,000 in grants from

USDA Rural Development, the

Vermont Department of Public

Service’s Clean Energy Development

Fund, CVPS and the Vermont Agency

of Agriculture, Food and Markets. 

The projected payback period

“pencils out at 4.3 years, but in reality is

closer to six years,” says Bill Rowell.

“Right now, it’s not feasible for farms

with a small herd size to use this

technology,” Rogers points out. “For a

100-cow operation, even a 300- or 400-

cow operation, this isn’t an

economically sound option. But for

farms with high cow numbers, like this

one, capturing waste production and

recycling that waste into a usable commodity makes smart economic sense.”

The Rowells’ herd produces 10

million gallons of manure yearly, which

is converted into enough methane to

produce 1.8 million kilowatt-hours of

electricity annually. The energy is

purchased by CVPS and sold to its

customers interested in “green energy.”

The additional four cents per kilowatthour paid by the consumer goes to the

participating farmers and effectively

covers the carbon offset, Brian Rowell

explains. 

In addition to the projected revenue,

the process has resulted in other

benefits. “It's lowered our somatic cell

count,” Bill Rowell says, “and we are

able to provide all our bedding needs

for the milking cows.” He estimates the

farm is saving $100,000 annually by

using the dry bio-solids from the

treated manure instead of sawdust for

bedding in their state-of-the-art freestall barns. They also supply dry

bedding for two local farms and several

nurseries and greenhouses. 

Stewards of the land

The dairy farmers have developed a

comprehensive nutrient management

plan in accordance with USDA’s

Natural Resources Conservation

Service (NRCS) Nutrient Management

Conservation Standards, according to

Kitsos. They follow Accepted

Agricultural Practices, established by

the Vermont Agency of Agriculture,

which were designed to help farmers

conserve and protect natural resources

through regulated spreading of manure,

crop rotation and installation of buffers

along drainage ditches to control

sediment, nutrients and pollutants in

runoff. 

“We are all just stewards of the land,

only here on earth for the time we are

granted,” Bill Rowell believes. “It is our

responsibility to care for the land and

resources until the next generation

takes over.” Both of Brian’s children,

Matthew, 13, and Megan, 11, help out

on the farm. 

Kitsos notes, “This dairy also is

working towards providing a scientific

database for the state of Vermont and

UVM for nutrient management in

conjunction with its anaerobic digester

and proposed settling pond, an

enhancement to the digester process.” 

Off the farm, Brian has been a town

selectman in Highgate for 15 years. Bill

was appointed by Governor Jim

Douglas to the CVPS Rural

Development Executive Committee,

which is charged with implementing

clean energy projects in the state, and

was a member of the Dairy Task Force

that worked with the U.S. Secretary of

Agriculture on the Farm Bill. He

recently was asked to serve on the

search committee for the new dean of

the UVM College of Agriculture and

Life Sciences and was instrumental in

establishing the Farmers Wetlands

Assistance Committee, which acts as a

liaison between Vermont’s dairy

producers and USDA/NRCS. 

“Green Mountain Dairy will

continue to succeed into the future

because they have a sound vision of

their business; are committed to solid

dairy, economic, and environmental

practices; and work with their families

and employees to further the success of

the farm,” Rogers concludes. “In

addition, they are willing to try new

ideas that make sense, fit the farm,

improve the environment and help the

community.” ■

“We are all just stewards of the land...

It is our responsibility to care for the land and

resources until the next generation takes over.” 

Vermont Dairy

continued from page 13
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 37

TITLE FEATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ISSUE—PAGE

Ag Versus Industrial Waste for Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 29

Alto Dairy sold to Saputo Cheese USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 35

Art & science of energy independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 26

Aurora Co-ops Centennial

As it turns 100, Nebraska co-op still growing with most ambitious endeavor in its history . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 10

Baltimore Biodiesel

Micro co-op contends with growing pains in quest for cleaner air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 28

Biodiesel at the Intersection

Processors cope with high feedstock prices, eye impact of renewable diesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 22

Bison co-op helping Native Americans develop production, marketing strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 32

Calling All Co-ops!

Carbon Credits for Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 10

CCA salutes top co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 26

CDF’s multi-pronged efforts support co-op mission in America and abroad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 28 

Charting a New Course

Community-supported fishery project may help Maine fishing co-op stay afloat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 4

CHS, AGP weigh multiple factors for feedstock choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 25

Co-op Link to Sustainability

NCFC study shows ‘farmer-owned’ message resonates with consumers on environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 4

Co-op Summit slated for Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 19

Co-op Vision & Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 31

Co-ops ring up additional $14 billion in sales via other ownership structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 18

Co-ops set new records for sales, income; Business volume tops $146 billion in 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 19

Consumer cooperator achievements recognized . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 41

Dairylea: A Century of Cooperation

Track record shows ability to adapt in tumultuous times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 16

Danger, risk part of fishing trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 6

Early disputes can derail co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 22

Ed Schafer takes reins at USDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 36

Energy innovators push technology curve ever forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 12

Farmers, Co-ops and Local Food Marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 10

Feeling the Squeeze

Tomato growers take big hit in food scare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 13

Getting Connected

Study sees USDA role in linking electricity from alternate energy sources to grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 16

Grain Industry must evolve, adjust to a new market paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 16

Great River Soy falls victim to soaring soybean oil prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 27

How the real salmonella culprit was found . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 15

Idaho’s Bounty

New food co-op helps meet growing demand for locally produced foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 4

Industrial lifecycle stages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 15

Investor’s Manual

New investment models could help reverse decline of local ownership of biofuel plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 4

Largest 100 ag co-ops post record sales, margins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 4

2008 Article Index

Information appearing in Rural Cooperatives magazine during

calendar year 2008 has been indexed to help you find past articles.

Articles are indexed by issue and page. Back issues can be found online at: www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/pub/openmag.htm
38 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Lassoing Wyoming’s Wind

Landowners band together to bargain for higher wind royalties . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 8

Marketing advantages of the co-op business model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 13

Michigan Turkey Cooperative Earns Product Center Award . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 35

New Orleans group attends co-op development training . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 33

North Wind

Alaska Village Electric named top wind co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 19

Northwest Passage

Co-ops should be trail-blazers for bioenergy industries in 

Northwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 12

Organic and Beyond

Consumer demand growing for differentiated farm products . . . . . . .March/April 16

Overcoming constraints to growth in biofuels industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 18

Ownership Manual

Study accesses four primary ownership models for biofuels . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 10

Paradigm shifting on nuclear power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 10

Pledges for the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 11

Quilters co-op goes private . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 24

Raising the Standard

Ability to add value, meet needs fuels West Central’s growth . . . . . . . . .May/June 14

Renewable energy issues focus of WIREC 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 12

Rewards of Ownership

Community-based renewable energy projects can produce big benefits . .Nov./Dec. 4

Sec. Schafer meets with NCFC leaders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 31

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops

Magazine pages reflect co-op progress, challenges, opportunities . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 20

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops, Part II

On ‘the street’ and in cyberspace, Rural Cooperatives still 

spreading word about power of co-ops business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 20

75 Years Strong: Oregon Cherry Co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 7

Sky’s the Limit! Housing co-op opens doors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 20

State of the Art

Arts and crafts co-ops help members tap markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 20

Tapping farm equity key to greater local ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 7

The New Quest for ‘Fire’

Renewable energy experts come to grips with challenge of the century at

WIREC ’08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 8

USDA Rural Development funds available for disaster relief efforts . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 34

Using the ‘extra-value index’ to measure ag co-op performance . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 22

Value definition can evolve during co-op’s life cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 36

Valuing Your Co-op

Meeting weighs value of co-ops in fast-changing business climate . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 34

Vermont dairy farm turns manure into renewable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 13

Washington farmers grow their own fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 33

Washington organic farmer wins AFT top award . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 39

Whatever It Takes

Land O’Lakes asks (and answers) some hard questions 

about its role in agribusiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 16

Wheat co-op pays record dividends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 38

Whey to Ethanol

Is there a biofuel role for dairy cooperatives? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 10

MAGAZINE DEPARTMENTS

Co-op Development Action

Housing crises presents opportunity for co-ops for 

low- & moderate-income people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 40

Maine Feeds Maine

Teleconference aims to promote growth of state’s local food networks . .July/Aug. 18

Poultry industry explores ecological options to save energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 14

Ride Sharing

Equipment- and labor-sharing co-ops can help farmers 

save on rising costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 32

School’s In!

California parents create childcare co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 25

Commentary

A link to the past, present and future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 2

Biodiesel has important role to play in reducing greenhouse emissions . . . . . .May/June 2

Capturing Value for Rural America: Strategic Choices for Renewable 

Energy Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 2

Co-ops and the future of Rural America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 2

Renewable energy: common goals, different paths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 2

Stories behind the numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 2

Focus On...

Burnett Dairy Co-op; Alpha, Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 32

Craftsmanship paried with technology as Bongards’ celebrates centennial . . .Nov./Dec. 8

In the Spotlight

A Nice Guy Who Finished First

Roy Orton’s track record at National Grape and CoBank earns top honors from

NCFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 25

Mission to Market Co-ops

MacDonald, NCBA Marking Committee work to expand public understanding of

cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 20

Management Tip

Co-op boards demonstrate leadership through strategic planning process . .Nov./Dec. 24

Sharing the North Fork Canyon Run

Insights from game theory for cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 28

Newsline

‘Energizing Rural America’ theme of USDA Ag Outlook Conference . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 38

Income, revenue climb at Riceland Foods

Brian Furnish to lead Burley Tobacco Co-op

GROWMARK, FS Seed Support Ag in the Classroom

Florida’s Natural squeezes out record revenue

Record earnings for CHS

Pappajohn drops plan to acquire ethanol plants

NCBA awarded $8 million grant to help Mozambique farmers

Blue Diamond sales hit $658 million

Frederick named ‘Honored Cooperator’

South Central Grain to merge with CHS

Florida sugar co-op and partner purchase Veracruz sugar plant

Sunkist to consolidate citrus juice and oil units

Walton EMC returns $3 million to members

Minn-Dak revenue tops $278 million

Agri-Mark has record earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 37

Snokist expanding processing; will exit fresh-produce sector

Sioux Center ethanol plant to double fuel production

New biodiesel facility opens in Colorado

Oemichen tells Senate panel about rural healthcare co-ops

ACE unveils new Web site

Tennessee Farmers Co-op sets new sales record

Co-ops to expand oilseed-crushing capability

Fonterra delays farmers’ sale vote

NCBA’s Paul Hazen addresses U.N. on co-ops and job growth

USDA renewable energy studies on Web

Bill Davisson named chairman of NCFC

Tobacco lawsuit ends with $100 million payment

Basin Electric forms wind subsidiary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 31

Sales, income soar for Land O’Lakes

Record $11.1 billion revenue for DFA

CRI revenue tops $125 million

AMPI’s Furth to retire following year of record income

NCGA promotes bulk-buying options

Co-op plans to buy N.D. hog plant

Landmark Co-op to build soy-crushing plant

Foremost reopens Waumandee cheese plant

U.S. Premium Beef selling National Beef to JBS-Swift

CHS buys Provista Renewable Fuels, Spokane’s Zip Trip

Tri-State joins renewable energy co-op

Organic Valley forms grower pool to ensure feed supply, price stability

Hanlin to succeed Lindgren at Sunkist

Co-ops form new grain venture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 35

CWT program to be renewed for 2009

Denim mill creates Internet store for sustainable, American-made fabric

New potato co-op formed

Pacific Northwest Farmers Co-op formed

USDA staff lead co-op seminar for United Nations’ panel

Southeast Milk to buy Winn-Dixie dairies

NCBA: Cooperatives get a boost in Farm Bill

Masterfeeds to purchase Land O’Lakes Canada’s Ontario feed business

New CEO at Accelerated Genetics

USDA loans $266 million to nine rural electric co-ops
Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 39

Capacity boosted at CHS refinery

Growers sue Diamond in pay dispute

Falcone to lead National Grape Co-op, Welch’s

FFA essay contest winners focus on co-ops

DFA uncovers ‘improper’ payment to former chairman

Farmer Co-ops Conference focus on stragegy, finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 34

Peltier leaving NCFC to lead grape/wine group

United to expand feed facility

Cal/West opens new HQ

Virginia to build seafood market

Webster Scholarship fund launched

AGP announces sale of AGP Grain Ltd.

GROWMARK purchases fuels terminal

Illinois & Iowa co-ops announce mergers

USDA awards $677 million to rural electric cooperatives

CHS Crop Nutrients expands Texas distribution facility

A&P Growers Co-op acquires Arizona orchards

Student-designed device may protect utility workers

Knouse to cease applesauce production at Inwood plant

Prairie Pride biodiesel plant fully operational . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 30

Ocean Spray opens world’s largest cranberry plant

AMPI names new CEO

Oglethorpe Power to build biomass power plants

USDA funds co-op centers

Minnesota dairy farmer to chair Foremost Farms

DFA adds Farm Services Division; explanding plant capacity in Colorado

Farm Credit System banks purchase $60 million of Farmer Mac stock

Midwest local co-ops buy fuel business

CountryMark drilling for oil across Illinois Basin region

Wisconsin co-ops approve merger

USDA’s James Baarda retires

USDA awards $1.8 billion in electric loans

Page From the Past

Cooperatives: tools for self-help . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 47

Burlington Consumers Co-op exceeds goal in 20th year . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 44

Poultry industry sees exempt trucking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 38

Utility Co-op Connection

Co-ops Get Serious About; Renewable Energy

Electric co-ops unite to form ‘Super REC’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 14

Keeping the Lights On

RECs face huge challenge as energy demand grows at twice rate of new power

generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 20

Lowering the Peak

Tornado impact prompts Illinois co-op to expand 

demand-management program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 34

Putting service ahead of profit helps utility co-ops win JD Power Award . . .Nov./Dec. 22

South Carolina co-op pursuing three-pronged energy strategy . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 31

Value-Added Corner

Ohio co-op’s soy-crushing plant produces for expanding 

trans-fat-free oil market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 27

SUBJECTS

Anniversaries

Aurora Co-ops Centennial

As it turns 100, Nebraska co-op still growing with most ambitious 

endeavor in its history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 10

Craftsmanship paried with technology as

Bongards’ celebrates centennial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 8

Dairylea: A Century of Cooperation

Track record shows ability to adapt in tumultuous times . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 16

Raising the Standard

Ability to add value, meet member needs fuels West Central’s growth . .May/June 14

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops

Magazine pages reflect co-op progress, challenges, opportunities . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 20

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops, Part II

On ‘the street’ and in cyberspace, Rural Cooperatives still spreading 

word about power of co-ops business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 20

75 Years Strong: Oregon Cherry Co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 7

Communications

CCA salutes top co-op communicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 26

Conferences

Energy innovators push technology curve ever forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 12

The New Quest for ‘Fire’

Renewable energy experts come to grips with challenge of the century at 

WIREC ’08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 8

Valuing Your Co-op

Meeting weighs value of co-ops in fast-changing business climate . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 34

Co-op Development

Art & science of energy independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 26

Bison co-op helping Native Americans develop production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 32

CDF’s multi-pronged efforts support co-op mission in America and abroad Nov./Dec. 28 

Charting a New Course

Community-supported fishery project may help 

Maine fishing co-op stay afloat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 4

Early disputes can derail co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 22

Housing crisis presents opportunity for co-ops for 

low- & moderate-income people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 40

Idaho’s Bounty

New food co-op helps meet growing demand for locally produced foods .May/June 4

Lassoing Wyoming’s Wind

Landowners band together to bargain for higher wind-power royalties . . .July/Aug. 8

Maine Feeds Maine

Teleconference aims to promote growth of state’s local food networks . .July/Aug. 18

New Orleans group attends co-op development training . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 33

Rewards of Ownership

Community-based renewable energy projects can produce big benefits . .Nov./Dec. 4

Ride Sharing

Equipment- and labor-sharing co-ops can help farmers 

save on rising costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 32

School’s In!

California parents create childcare co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 25

Sky’s the Limit! Housing co-op opens doors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 20

Co-op Month

Calling All Co-ops!

Co-ops urged to get involved in Co-op Month ’08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 39

Mission to Market Co-ops

MacDonald, NCBA Marking Committee work to expand public understanding of

cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 20

Co-op Principles/Advantages/Theory

Co-op Vision & Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 31

Marketing advantages of the co-op business model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 13

Northwest Passage

Co-ops should be trail-blazers for bioenergy industries in Northwest March/April 12

Sharing the North Fork Canyon Run

Insights from game theory for cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 28

Valuing Your Co-op

Meeting weighs value of co-ops in fast-changing business climate . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 34

Craft Co-ops

Early disputes can derail co-ops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 22

State of the Art

Arts and crafts co-ops help members tap markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 20

Quilters co-op goes private . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 24

Dairy

Alto Dairy sold to Saputo Cheese USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 35

Burnett Dairy Co-op; Alpha, Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 32

Carbon Credits for Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 10

Craftsmanship paried with technology as Bongards’ celebrates centennial . . .Nov./Dec. 8

Dairylea: A Century of Cooperation

Track record shows ability to adapt in tumultuous times . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 16

Vermont dairy farm turns manure into renewable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 13

Whatever It Takes

Land O’Lakes asks (and answers) some hard questions 

about its role in agribusiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 16

Whey to Ethanol

Is there a biofuel role for dairy cooperatives? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 10
40 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

Directors

A Nice Guy Who Finished First

Roy Orton’s track record at National Grape earns top honors from

NCFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 25

Co-op boards demonstrate leadership through strategic planning process . .Nov./Dec. 24

Education

Calling All Co-ops!

Co-ops urged to get involved in Co-op Month ’08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 39

Co-ops Get Serious About; Renewable Energy

Electric co-ops unite to form ‘Super REC’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 14

Mission to Market Co-ops

MacDonald, NCBA Marking Committee work to expand public understanding of

cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 20

New Orleans group attends co-op development training . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 33

School’s In!

California parents create childcare co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 25

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops

Magazine pages reflect co-op progress, challenges, opportunities . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 20

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops, Part II

On ‘the street’ and in cyberspace, Rural Cooperatives still spreading word about 

power of co-ops business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 20

Finance/Tax/Legal

Getting Connected

Study sees USDA role in linking electricity from alternate energy 

sources to grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 16

Grain Industry must evolve, adjust to a new market paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 16

Investor’s Manual

New investment models could help reverse decline of local ownership of biofuel 

plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 4

Sec. Schafer meets with NCFC leaders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 31

Tapping farm equity key to greater local ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 7

Fishing/Aquaculture

Charting a New Course

Community-supported fishery project may help 

Maine fishing co-op stay afloat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 4

Danger, risk part of fishing trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 6

Food Safety

Feeling the Squeeze

Tomato growers take big hit in food scare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 13

How the real salmonella culprit was found . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 15

Fruits, Nuts, Vegetables

A Nice Guy Who Finished First

Roy Orton’s track record at National Grape earns top honors . . . . . . .March/April 25

Co-op Link to Sustainability

NCFC study shows ‘farmer-owned’ message resonates with consumers on 

environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 4

Feeling the Squeeze

Tomato growers take big hit in food scare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 13

How the real salmonella culprit was found . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 15

75 Years Strong: Oregon Cherry Co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 7

Grains & Oilseeds

Aurora Co-op’s Centennial

As it turns 100, Nebraska co-op still growing with ambitious endeavor . .July/Aug. 10

Biodiesel at the Intersection

Processors cope with high feedstock prices, eye impact of renewable 

diesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 22

CHS, AGP weigh multiple factors for feedstock choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 25

Grain Industry must evolve, adjust to a new market paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 16

Great River Soy falls victim to soaring soybean oil prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 27

Ohio co-op’s soy-crushing plant produces for expanding 

trans-fat-free oil market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 27

Overcoming constraints to growth in biofuels industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 18

Raising the Standard

Ability to add value, meet member needs fuels West Central’s growth . .May/June 14

Housing Co-ops

Housing crisis presents opportunity for co-ops for low- & moderate-income 

people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 40

Sky’s the Limit! Housing co-op opens doors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 20

Livestock & Poultry

Bison co-op helping Native Americans develop production, marketing 

strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 32

Michigan Turkey Cooperative Earns Product Center Award . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 35

Poultry industry explores ecological options to save energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 14

Management

Co-op boards demonstrate leadership through strategic planning process . .Nov./Dec. 24

Sharing the North Fork Canyon Run

Insights from game theory for cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 28

Using the ‘extra-value index’ to measure ag co-op performance . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 22

Valuing Your Co-op

Meeting weighs value of co-ops in fast-changing business climate . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 34

Marketing

Baltimore Biodiesel

Micro co-op contends with growing pains in quest for cleaner air . . . . .May/June 28

Biodiesel at the Intersection

Processors cope with high feedstock prices, eye impact of renewable 

diesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 22

Co-op Link to Sustainability

NCFC study shows ‘farmer-owned’ message resonates with consumers on 

environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 4

Co-ops ring up additional $14 billion in sales via other ownership structures Nov./Dec. 18

Co-ops set new records for sales, income; Business volume tops $146 billion in 

2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 19

Dairylea: A Century of Cooperation

Track record shows ability to adapt in tumultuous times . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 16

Farmers, Co-ops and Local Food Marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 10

Idaho’s Bounty

New food co-op helps meet growing demand for locally produced foods .May/June 4

Largest 100 ag co-ops post record sales, margins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 4

Maine Feeds Maine

Teleconference aims to promote growth of state’s local food networks . .July/Aug. 18

Mission to Market Co-ops

MacDonald, NCBA Marking Committee work to expand public understanding of

cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 20

Organic and Beyond

Consumer demand growing for differentiated farm products . . . . . . .March/April 16

75 Years Strong: Oregon Cherry Co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 7

State of the Art

Arts and crafts co-ops help members tap markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 20

Member Relations

Whatever It Takes

Land O’Lakes asks (and answers) some hard questions about its role in 

agribusiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 16

Renewable Energy

Ag Versus Industrial Waste for Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 29

Baltimore Biodiesel

Micro co-op contends with growing pains in quest for cleaner air . . . . .May/June 28

Biodiesel at the Intersection

Processors cope with high feedstock prices, eye impact of 

renewable diesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 22

Carbon Credits for Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 10

CHS, AGP weigh multiple factors for feedstock choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 25

Co-ops Get Serious About Renewable Energy

Electric co-ops unite to form ‘Super REC’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 14

Energy innovators push technology curve ever forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 12

Getting Connected

Study sees USDA role in linking electricity from alternate energy sources to 

grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 16

Great River Soy falls victim to soaring soybean oil prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 27

Investor’s Manual

New investment models could help reverse decline of local ownership of biofuel 

plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 4

Keeping the Lights On

RECs face huge challenge as energy demand grows at twice rate of new power

generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 20

Lassoing Wyoming’s Wind

Landowners band together to bargain for higher wind-power royalties . . .July/Aug. 8
Northwest Passage

Co-ops should be trail-blazers for bioenergy industries in 

Northwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 12

North Wind

Alaska Village Electric named top wind co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 19

Overcoming constraints to growth in biofuels industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 18

Ownership Manual

Study accesses four primary ownership models for biofuels . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 10

Poultry industry explores ecological options to save energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 14

Raising the Standard

Ability to add value, meet member needs fuels West Central’s growth . .May/June 14

Rewards of Ownership

Community-based renewable energy projects can 

produce big benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 4

South Carolina co-op pursuing three-pronged energy strategy . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 31

Tapping farm equity key to greater local ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 7

The New Quest for ‘Fire’

Renewable energy experts come to grips with challenge of the century at 

WIREC ’08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 8

Vermont dairy farm turns manure into renewable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 13

Whey to Ethanol

Is there a biofuel role for dairy cooperatives? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 10

Statistics

Co-ops ring up additional $14 billion in sales via other 

ownership structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 18

Co-ops set new records for sales, income; Business volume tops 

$146 billion in 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 19

Largest 100 ag co-ops post record sales, margins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 4

Supply

Aurora Co-op’s Centennial

As it turns 100, Nebraska co-op still growing with most ambitious 

endeavor in its history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 10

Co-ops set new records for sales, income; Business volume tops $146 billion 

in 2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 19

Largest 100 ag co-ops post record sales, margins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 4

Raising the Standard

Ability to add value, meet member needs fuels West Central’s growth . .May/June 14

Whatever It Takes

Land O’Lakes asks (and answers) some hard questions about its role in 

agribusiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 16

Sustainable/Local/Organic

Charting a New Course

Community-supported fishery project may help Maine fishing co-op stay 

afloat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 4

Consumer cooperator achievements recognized . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 41

Co-op Link to Sustainability

NCFC study shows ‘farmer-owned’ message resonates with consumers on

environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 4

Farmers, Co-ops and Local Food Marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 10

Idaho’s Bounty

New food co-op helps meet growing demand for locally produced foods .May/June 4

Maine Feeds Maine

Teleconference aims to promote growth of state’s local food networks . .July/Aug. 18

Organic and Beyond

Consumer demand growing for differentiated farm products . . . . . . .March/April 16

Technology/Machinery

A Nice Guy Who Finished First

Roy Orton’s track record at National Grape and CoBank earns top honors from

NCFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 25

Ag Versus Industrial Waste for Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 29

Energy innovators push technology curve ever forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 12

Lowering the Peak

Tornado impact prompts Illinois co-op to expand demand-management 

program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 34

Ride Sharing

Equipment- and labor-sharing co-ops can help farmers save on rising 

costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 32

Transportation

Overcoming constraints to growth in biofuels industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 18

Utility Co-ops

Co-ops Get Serious About; Renewable Energy

Electric co-ops unite to form ‘Super REC’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 14

Getting Connected

Study sees USDA role in linking electricity from alternate energy sources to 

grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 16

Keeping the Lights On

RECs face huge challenge as energy demand grows at twice rate 

of new power generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 20

Lowering the Peak

Tornado impact prompts Illinois co-op to expand demand-management 

program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 34

North Wind

Alaska Village Electric named top wind co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 19

Putting service ahead of profit helps utility co-ops win 

JD Power Award . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 22

South Carolina co-op pursuing three-pronged energy strategy . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 31

Value Added 

Burnett Dairy Co-op; Alpha, Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 32

Michigan Turkey Cooperative Earns Product Center Award . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 35

Ohio co-op’s soy-crushing plant produces for expanding trans-fat-free oil 

market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 27

AUTHORS

Atwood, Lindsay

Co-ops Get Serious About Renewable Energy

Electric co-ops unite to form ‘Super REC’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 14

Idaho’s Bounty

New co-op helps meet growing demand for locally produced foods . . . . .May/June 4

Mission to Market Co-ops

MacDonald, NCBA Marking Committee work to expand public 

understanding of cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 20

Quilters co-op goes private . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 24

State of the Art

Arts and crafts co-ops help members tap markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 20

Borst, Alan

Farmers, Co-ops and Local Food Marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 10

Getting Connected

Study sees USDA role in linking electricity from alternate energy 

sources to grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 16

Bowden, Melanie

School’s In!

California parents create childcare co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 25

Bowman, Eric

Northwest Passage

Co-ops should be trail-blazers for bioenergy industries 

in Northwest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 12

Brockhouse, Bill

Lassoing Wyoming’s Wind

Landowners band together to bargain for higher 

wind-power royalties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 8

Campbell, Dan

A link to the past, present and future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 2

Alto Dairy sold to Saputo Cheese USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 35

Charting a New Course

Community-supported fishery project may help 

Maine fishing co-op stay afloat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 4

Danger, risk part of fishing trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 6

Energy innovators push technology curve ever forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 12

Raising the Standard

Ability to add value, meet member needs fuels West Central’s growth . .May/June 14

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops

Magazine pages reflect co-op progress, challenges, opportunities . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 20

75 Years of Chronicling Co-ops, Part II

On ‘the street’ and in cyberspace, Rural Cooperatives still spreading 

word about power of co-ops business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 20

Sky’s the Limit! Housing co-op opens door . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 20

Stories behind the numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 2

Rural Cooperatives / November/December 2008 41
42 November/December / Rural Cooperatives

The New Quest for ‘Fire’

Renewable energy experts come to grips with challenge of the century at 

WIREC ’08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 8

Chesnick, David

Investor’s Manual

New investment models could help reverse decline of local ownership of biofuel 

plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan.Feb. 4

Largest 100 ag co-ops post record sales, margins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 4

Tapping farm equity key to greater local ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 7

Coontz, E. Kim

Housing crisis presents opportunity for co-ops for low- & moderate-income 

people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 40

Crooks, Anthony

Biodiesel at the Intersection

Processors cope with high feedstock prices, eye impact of renewable 

diesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 22

CHS, AGP weigh multiple factors for feedstock choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 25

Ownership Manual

Study accesses four primary ownership models for biofuels . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 10

Curti, Julie

Rewards of Ownership

Community-based renewable energy projects can produce big benefits . .Nov./Dec. 4

Daughrity, Patricia

A Nice Guy Who Finished First

Roy Orton’s track record at National Grape and CoBank earns top honors 

from NCFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 25

DiPofi, Phil

Grain Industry must evolve, adjust to a new market paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 16

Dorr, Thomas

Capturing Value for Rural America: Strategic Choices for Renewable Energy 

Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 2

Co-ops and the future of Rural America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 2

Renewable energy: common goals, different paths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 2

Ebert, Jessica

Ag Versus Industrial Waste for Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 29

Eversull, E. Eldon

Co-ops ring up additional $14 billion in sales via other 

ownership structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 18

Largest 100 ag co-ops post record sales, margins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 4

Frederick, Donald A.

Overcoming constraints to growth in biofuels industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 18

Freeman, Jean

Co-op boards demonstrate leadership through strategic planning process . .Nov./Dec. 24

Goetz, Justin

Rewards of Ownership

Community-based renewable energy projects can produce big benefits . .Nov./Dec. 4

Halvorsen, Lisa

Vermont dairy farm turns manure into renewable energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 13

Heckathorn, Carissa

Calling All Co-ops!

Co-ops urged to get involved in Co-op Month ’08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 39

Jobe, Joe

Biodiesel has important role to play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions . . .May/June 2

Johnson, Mark S.

Whatever It Takes

Land O’Lakes asks (and answers) some hard questions about its role in 

agribusiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 16

Jones, Michael

Ohio co-op’s soy-crushing plant produces for expanding trans-fat-free oil 

market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 27

Liebrand, Carolyn

Carbon Credits for Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 10

Using the ‘extra-value index’ to measure ag co-op performance . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 22

Lies, Mitch

75 Years Strong: Oregon Cherry Co-op . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 7

Ling, K. Charles

Carbon Credits for Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 10

Whey to Ethanol

Is there a biofuel role for dairy cooperatives? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 10

Livingston, Jane

Art & science of energy independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 26

Maine Feeds Maine

Teleconference aims to promote growth of state’s local food networks . .July/Aug. 18

Ride Sharing

Equipment- and labor-sharing co-ops can help farmers save on rising 

costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 32

Mayberry, Anne

Keeping the Lights On

RECs face huge challenge as energy demand grows at twice rate of new power 

generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 20

Lowering the Peak

Tornado impact prompts Illinois co-op to expand demand-management 

program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .March/April 34

Putting service ahead of profit helps utility co-ops win JD Power Award . . .Nov./Dec. 22

South Carolina co-op pursuing three-pronged energy strategy . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 31

Painter, Kathleen

Organic and Beyond

Consumer demand growing for differentiated farm products . . . . . . .March/April 16

Pitman, Lynn

Valuing Your Co-op

Meeting weighs value of co-ops in fast-changing business climate . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 34

Reynolds, Bruce

Sharing the North Fork Canyon Run

Insights from game theory for cooperatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 28

Schofer, Dan

Bison co-op helping Native Americans develop production, marketing 

strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Jan./Feb. 32

Thomas, Steven

CDF’s multi-pronged efforts support co-op mission in America and abroad Nov./Dec. 28 

Thompson, Stephen

Baltimore Biodiesel

Micro co-op contends with growing pains in quest for cleaner air . . . . .May/June 28

Feeling the Squeeze

Tomato growers take big hit in food scare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 13

How the real salmonella culprit was found . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 15

Washington farmers grow their own fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 33

Todd, Anne

Burnett Dairy Co-op; Alpha, Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .July/Aug. 32

Craftsmanship paried with technology as Bongards’ celebrates centennial . . .Nov./Dec. 8

Dairylea: A Century of Cooperation

Track record shows ability to adapt in tumultuous times . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sept./Oct. 16

Great River Soy falls victim to soaring soybean oil prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May/June 27

Uptagraff, Donna

Poultry industry explores ecological options to save energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nov./Dec. 14

Periodicals Postage Paid

U.S. Department of Agriculture

44 November/December / 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

mil 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