Do Farmers and Ranchers have the Moral Courage to Say "NO"?
- Anthony Kathol
- 20 minutes ago
- 3 min read
I came across another article about farmers saying "NO" to Big Tech. The author of this article writes how a Mason County, Kentucky, family said no to two offers:
Bare turned down an eye-watering offer of $48,000 an acre for her 463‑acre farm, and her mother Ida Huddleston rejected an even richer offer of $60,000 per acre for her 71-acre farm.
You can read the full text of the story here:
Americans are witnessing a modern-day “gold rush” as hyperscale Artificial Intelligence (AI) data centers are rapidly constructed across the country. In many cases, venture capitalists and corporate developers quietly purchase large tracts of land and place them under non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), shielding from the public who is behind the transactions. Their goal is simple: secure property early and profit from the explosive growth of AI infrastructure. Yet this rush often proceeds with little transparency about the immense energy, water, and land resources these facilities consume—or the long-term impacts they may leave on small-town communities, all in the name of “economic development.”
Farmers and ranchers ultimately have a significant voice in determining whether these data centers come to their communities. The real question is whether they have the moral courage to say “no” to the financial incentives being placed before them. I strongly support local control and the rights of private property owners; however, we must also ask ourselves what price we are willing to pay as a society to preserve our agricultural heritage. If farmland and ranchland continue to be converted for massive industrial developments, will the next generation of agricultural producers have the same opportunities that previous generations enjoyed?
Fortunately, some landowners have already chosen not to take the bait, recognizing the importance of protecting working farmland and ranchland from being swallowed by outside investors. No amount of money can replace the value of the land and the way of life that makes this place we call home so special.
Don’t get me wrong: as a candidate for District 27 State Senate, I will continue to support sustainable economic development that strengthens housing infrastructure and supports local small businesses, farmers, and ranchers—not the corporate elite seeking taxpayer-funded subsidies to boost their bottom line. At the same time, the citizens of this state have a moral responsibility to preserve what we have today for the next generation of South Dakota farmers and ranchers, on whom our small-town businesses depend. Our farmers and ranchers remain the backbone of this country, rising early each morning to feed the American people.
Thankfully, during this past legislative session, the South Dakota Legislature passed Senate Bill 135, commonly referred to as the Data Center Bill of Rights for Citizens. The measure is currently awaiting the Governor’s signature. Lawmakers also rejected several proposed bills that would have extended additional tax breaks for the development of hyperscale AI data centers.
To those ranchers who may be inclined or tempted to sell out for top dollar, may I offer a piece of advice?
I am one of ten children who grew up on a small family farm north of Yankton. My parents were not materially rich. In fact, during the 1980s farm crisis, they were presented with a foreclosure notice when interest rates climbed above 18 percent because they could not pay down the principal due to the high interest rates. While they lacked material wealth, my parents had something far more valuable: each other and a deep faith in God, which they passed down to their ten children.
No dollar value can be placed on life and family. My father has since passed away, and my mother remains the matriarch of a family that continues to grow—now blessed with 30 grandchildren and 20 great-grandchildren, with two more on the way. My mom often said, “The more you make, the more you spend.” My father would say, “Never satisfied,” reflecting on how corporate agriculture was steadily swallowing family farms across Nebraska and South Dakota, concentrating land ownership into fewer and fewer hands controlled by large packing houses.
We are at a crossroads in America.
The decisions about land stewardship being made today will determine what kind of countryside our children and grandchildren inherit tomorrow. Land is more than an asset on a balance sheet—it is the foundation of our communities, our food supply, and our way of life. Long after the latest technological boom fades and corporate investors move on to the next opportunity, the land will remain. My hope and prayer is that we have the wisdom and courage to protect it—just as some have done in Kentucky—so that future generations of farmers and ranchers can continue to work the soil, feed the American people, and call this beautiful place home.
